Druid Changes Patch 3.1 - Page 17

Celeras · 02/26/09, 12:37 AM

Originally Posted by seminarca

New PTR push, Glyph of Shred got changed:

Another PvP nerf, but for PvE this could be worth using over Glyph of Rip if we can get 3 Shreds in before Rip expires. Even if we only get 2 Shreds, it makes this equivalent to Glyph of Rip, so with OoC procs and smart TF usage, on average this should be better.

Is it just your assumption that they won't stack? Or do you have that tested already.

Mowen · 02/26/09, 1:17 AM

He never said anything about it not stacking.

Wow, we have pretty much gone from having 2 useful PVE kitty DPS glyphs and using our third to benefit some emergency/OT capacity (or brez/any other utility role) to having more glyphs than we know what to do with.

Glyph of Mangle is so useful for not having to waste time refreshing the debuff (6 seconds is a hell of a long time to loose) and I hate messing up and having bleeds tick without it or shred without it. I can see this one getting on the chopping block if there are enough feral tanks around but that is far from a reliable situation.

The Glyph of Rip/Glyph of Shred change out has some merits but using them both and we can potentially get an extra 10 seconds of Rip which makes Savage Gore/idol of worship (or similar) so hot and FB a much more common finisher for that extra DPS burst.

The new Glyph of Berserk is the wild card glyph, some hard core theory crafter is going to have to work out if and extra 6% damage with SR up is worth losing those extra rip ticks or the pain of refreshing mangle more often.

Celeras · 02/26/09, 1:57 AM

Originally Posted by Mowen

He never said anything about it not stacking.

I had assumed he was implying that. Because if they do indeed stack, then the Glyph of Rip is not at all devalued and definitely would not be replaced with the new shred glyph as you'd want to use them both.

There certainly are alot of things that add to Rip Duration now, including the T7 2pc. Id be interested to find out for sure if they all stacked, as well as Nourish Glyph+T7 4pc for our resto friends.

nightcrowler · 02/26/09, 2:27 AM

Just a quick consideration about the changes.

I've remake my cat simulator before the new shred idol.

And here the results:
Before the patch with the gear avaiable the maximum dps was 5300 after the 3.1 is 6200. 17% increase.
The change in SR is nothing great (about 50-70 more dps).
The big changes were SR glyph and Primal Gore.

The new ability value follows (assuming best in slot items):

Stats
Expertise 33
Hit 33
Agility 26
Strengh 24
Feral AP 12
Crit 20
Armor Pen 20
AP 10
Haste 15

The bad things about it is that FB was basically cut out of our cycle (from 2 FB every 3 RIP, to 1 FB every 10 RIP)
the new shred glyph will probably solve the problem increasing the duration of rip making FB viable while keeping RIP up. The only problem I dare is the following: will we use 2T7 in T9?

If anyone can test the new shred glyph to understand the mechanics, I'll be happy.

Mijae · 02/26/09, 2:46 AM

Originally Posted by nightcrowler

The bad things about it is that FB was basically cut out of our cycle (from 2 FB every 3 RIP, to 1 FB every 10 RIP)

Wouldn't the worst case be one FB every berserk? Without the Shred glyph that would be 1 in 9.

seminarca · 02/26/09, 3:23 AM

Originally Posted by Celeras

Is it just your assumption that they won't stack? Or do you have that tested already.

I was assuming we wouldn't want to drop Glyph of Savage Roar or Glyph of Mangle. 33% reduction in Mangle usage and 6% extra damage are pretty decent and at first glance I think it would be more useful to hang on to than 2 extra Rip ticks. Of course, we'd need to run the numbers to know for sure.

nightcrowler · 02/26/09, 4:31 AM

Originally Posted by Mijae

Wouldn't the worst case be one FB every berserk? Without the Shred glyph that would be 1 in 9.

Only if your fight time duration is a multiple of berserk cd. But it's not really important, if it's 1/9, 1/10 or also 1/5 with an high crit. The bad things was that they need to find a way to let us FB more, not less. And the shred glyph is a right way. I'll modify my simulator soon and post the new data.

Estherion · 02/26/09, 5:38 AM

Originally Posted by nightcrowler

The only problem I dare is the following: will we use 2T7 in T9?

Some dared (? sorry, don't know if it's an irregular verb) to use the 2T4 in T6 because of the +20 energy proc. Now, we can only wait & see, because it will only depends on the bonuses the new tiers will give. Anyhow, i didn't find any informations about the T8, no bonuses yet...?

Also sitting on a nobles deck... trade in for the agi version? Glad I didn't have it 2 weeks ago I would have grabbed str deck for sure.

Well, comparing the str before and after the change of SR, the loss is about 3% on this card only. I don't think this only change would make the agi card better. With the glyph, it might be a 4% loss, but nothing really bad. I think the str card is still better.

Murna · 02/26/09, 5:42 AM

Originally Posted by Estherion

Well, comparing the str before and after the change of SR, the loss is about 3% on this card only. I don't think this only change would make the agi card better. With the glyph, it might be a 4% loss, but nothing really bad. I think the str card is still better.

Well, you mention SR and the Glyph, but you seem to forget the new Talent Primal Gore. Crit becomes much more important to us, thus making Agility more important.

It still needs to be found out, if Agility or Strength will be the better stat for kittys.

Ragnorr · 02/26/09, 5:51 AM

Shred and rip glyph stacks

Taudark · 02/26/09, 8:18 AM

Originally Posted by Celeras

I had assumed he was implying that. Because if they do indeed stack, then the Glyph of Rip is not at all devalued and definitely would not be replaced with the new shred glyph as you'd want to use them both.

Is that really true? From what I can see mangle glyph should be better than rip glyph (unless you have a mangle/trauma bot) since mangle glyph adds a higher duration and it costs more energy. And Savage Roar glyph will be a must.

humbe · 02/26/09, 8:53 AM

Here is some math on why, as far as I can calculate, savage defense will be a big nerf..

Assume raidbuffed, you have 6000 AP and 40% crit. This is not too bad numbers anyways. Yours may vary, but you can always redo my calculations with your own numbers. Just because I've calculated my own armor mitigation numbers, I'll use mine. These are 34928 raid buffed in 3.0.9 and will become 29013 in 3.1.0 if they go ahead with nerfing SotF from 66% to 33%.

Mitigation factor with PotP and my armor in 3.0.9 = 0.323 * 0.88 = 0.28424
Mitigation factor with PotP and my armor in 3.1.0 = 0.364 * 0.88 = 0.32032

Extra damage taken in 3.1.0 due to lower mitigation: (0.32032 / 0.28424 - 1) * 100% = 12.69 %

Since Savage Defense don't scale with incoming damage, we need to know boss DPS and attack speed in order to calculate how much damage we mitigate with the shield. I ignore avoidance, and calculate as if all attacks hit. My calculations follow:

Savage Defense Factor = (Boss damage per attack - Average damage blocked by Savage Defense) / Boss damage per attack
Boss damage per attack = Boss DPS * Boss attack speed
Average damage blocked by Savage Defense = Damage blocked by Savage Defense * Chance of critting between boss attacks
Damage blocked by Savage Defense = Attack Power / (4 * Mitigation factor)
Chance of critting between boss attacks = 1 - (1 - Crit chance) ^ Average number of hits between boss attacks
Average number of hits between boss attacks = Boss attack speed / Druid auto attack speed + Boss attack speed / Global cooldown

Here are the average damage mitigated by savage defense been calculated from various test boss damage scenarios:

Boss DPS 70000, 1s attack speed: 2.81 % reduced damage (Patchwerk)
Boss DPS 40000, 2s attack speed: 4.27 %
Boss DPS 20000, 2s attack speed: 8.53 %
Boss DPS 10000, 2s attack speed: 17.1 %

And retried with 100% chance of shield being up:

Boss DPS 70000, 1s attack speed: 6.68 % (Patchwerk)
Boss DPS 40000, 2s attack speed: 5.85 %
Boss DPS 20000, 2s attack speed: 11.69 %
Boss DPS 10000, 2s attack speed: 23.39 %

We need a boss with less than 20000 DPS for this to not be a nerf (More than the 12.69% mitigation lost in armor). Even if we assume the shield is always up. Isn't that an easy encounter anyways? Doesn't sound like an encounter where healing is an issue. On top of this, not only is the shield crap unless you're taking very little damage, but it's unreliable avoidance instead of reliable mitigation too.

According to my calculations, based on a TTL rating of stats (World of Warcraft - Evaluating druid tank gear), even, assuming 10000 boss DPS, 1 AGI is worth more than 10 AP or 5 crit rating with my current gear level. At patchwerk levels, 1 AGI is like 75 AP or 25 crit rating with my current (but not awesome) gear level.

This makes AP and crit really bad stats for survival purposes, compared to their item budget values.

RoboStac · 02/26/09, 9:24 AM

Damage blocked by Savage Defense = Attack Power / (4 * Mitigation factor)

Why does your armor mitigation factor come into this calculation at all?

Every single shield effect currerntly in the game works after damage reduction - theres no reason to assume this won't.

humbe · 02/26/09, 9:32 AM

Originally Posted by RoboStac

Why does your armor mitigation factor come into this calculation at all?

Every single shield effect currerntly in the game works after damage reduction - theres no reason to assume this won't.

Exactly.. It's to calculate the raw damage from boss we end up blocking..

If boss does 1000 damage and we have 50% reduction from armor, we take 500 damage. If a shield blocks 100 of the 500, it actually blocks 100 / 0.5 = 200 of the 1000 raw damage the boss outputs.

Thus, I divide damage blocked by shield by the reduction factor, to be able to compare it to the Boss damage prior to any mitigation.

Edit: Instead of calculating savage defense block of raw damage, I could instead just have added mitigation to the boss damage instead. It's just a matter of preference.. This would create the same result:

Savage Defense Factor = (Boss damage per attack * Mitigation factor - Average damage blocked by Savage Defense) / (Boss damage per attack * Mitigation factor)
Damage blocked by Savage Defense = Attack Power / 4

Also note that boss attack speed is a bit confused in the formula above. When calculating Boss damage per attack, boss attack speed is used as normal, but for calculating chance to crit, boss attack speed modified by infected wounds is used. It is calculated correctly in the numbers I gave above, but I shoulda used another name for the modified boss attack speed part in the formulas

Eilt · 02/26/09, 9:38 AM

We are looking at Typhoon.

I believe we fixed the Starfall coefficient already.

We will probably just leave the Owlkin Frenzy talent as is on live rather than risk the PvP nerf. If druids want to stand in the fire with the paladins in PvE, we'll live. Take it up with your healers.

We are also looking at (sigh) Eclipse yet again to make sure the Wrath part of the equation holds up.

We discussed looking at Insect Swarm. It's been a long day, and I can't recall what we decided.

This a blue post, from a PvP discussion section on moonkins.

1. Typhoon needs some PvP love, and it may get it
2. This appears to confirm the earlier math in another thread that we have already gotten the starfall buff.
3. Owlkin Frenzy will remain a confusion to many PvE moonkins that think it is better than other talents.
4. Eclipse RNG may be getting a look? I think this is the biggest part of this post, just imagine if our Wrath had more than a 60% chance to proc Eclipse, I know moonkins are pretty happy right now, but just thinking about this makes me excited.
5. Maybe even an IS buff, it is already decent with t7 bonuses and glyph if they buff it it may be worth it to consider rotations closing in on 100% uptime (instead of just applying it before wrath spam)

I am pretty happy to see moonkins being talked about at least, hopefully we will see some more on this for 3.1 and not a future patch.