The Way of the Sword: Retribution in Cataclysm - Page 58

Nairobi the Kenyan · 10/15/10, 7:41 PM

Originally Posted by Teleros

More incoming Beta changes from MMO-C:

Holy:

Holy Wrath base damage up by 30%.
Exorcism nerfed to scale with 15% AP or SP, down from 22.5%. Base damage buffed by 30%.

Retribution:

Hammer of Wrath base damage up by 300%.
Crusader Strike does 150% damage, up from 120%.

Tier 11 Design: http://media.mmo-champion.com/images...din_tier11.jpg
Looks okay as far as these things go IMHO.

Taken from that same MMO-C post:

Spell Changes
A lot of these changes are most likely the hotfixes we saw on live servers. They probably do not reflect how Blizzard wants to build classes at 85 and I will punch you in the face if you whine about it on forums. Seriously, I will.

If you look at it closely, most of these changes are just proper documentation of the changes announced on live servers earlier this week.

Likely just un-stealthing the stealth changes. Don't anticipate more INCOMING HoW nerfs, etc.

However, its nice to have tangible values for the buffs/nerfs rather than attaining them through regression!

Danath · 10/15/10, 7:44 PM

Originally Posted by Nairobi the Kenyan

Taken from that same MMO-C post:

Spell Changes
A lot of these changes are most likely the hotfixes we saw on live servers. They probably do not reflect how Blizzard wants to build classes at 85 and I will punch you in the face if you whine about it on forums. Seriously, I will.

If you look at it closely, most of these changes are just proper documentation of the changes announced on live servers earlier this week.

Likely just un-stealthing the stealth changes. Don't anticipate more INCOMING HoW nerfs, etc.

However, its nice to have tangible values for the buffs/nerfs rather than attaining them through regression!

So this means that, at least partly, those hotfixes were something Blizzard could have in mind for 85 too.

Otherwise, they probably would have never made it to beta. Right?

Nairobi the Kenyan · 10/15/10, 8:12 PM

Anything we hypothesize about what Blizz does or doesn't have in mind is likely to be conjecture at best. That said, GC once said he was "comfortable with how the classes played on our internal servers" and after the builds went public in 4.0.1 he said "some unforeseen issues have arisen and we will be patching them appropriately". I interpret that to mean they were focused on 85 only and they did some of this stuff to stop the flood of tears that became the WOW forums, but like I said, that's heresay at best.

The fact that Boub, who is a lot more in tune with Blizz than I, or likely most ppl here, said that "they probably do not reflect how Blizz wants classes to be at 85" makes me think this is simply a bandaid to make these 2 months more of an even playing field.

Durandal · 10/16/10, 7:21 PM

I didn't read anything about a buff to Guardian of Ancient Kings but on beta it hit for 318,000 when its timer ran out at a 10 stack. 10443 damage plus another 10443 damage per application of ancient kings is what the tooltip reads. Worth a 5 min CD now. It's overpowered in PvP and one shots people though.

Manse · 10/17/10, 5:47 AM

I noticed the same thing tonight while doing some randoms on my Pally. "Ancient Power" even at the end of a 3 minute fight accounted for 19% of my damage (next closest was TV at 17%). Wish I would have got a screen shot of it but I got kicked off the beta. I don't recall reading about any buffs to it. And even though it needed buffs, this isn't the right one to have made. I'm anticipating a nerf.

Teleros · 10/17/10, 7:02 AM

I'd guess someone tacked at extra zero on the end of its explosion damage - 32k damage (given how it works & its cooldown) sounds okay, but 320k... yeah...

Estha · 10/18/10, 6:10 AM

For me it was somewhat around 115-215k damage. Does it scale with AP?

The tooltip confirms the number as intended, but I can't imagine this status will prevail very long.
I was also under the impression, that AW had no influence on the guardians dmg, neither his suicide explosion nor melee hits. Any suggestions?

Danath · 10/19/10, 5:59 AM

Retribution

* Guardian of Ancient Kings now causes 1750 damage plus 1750 per Application, down from 5250 plus 5250.
* Sheath of Light now increases spell hit by 8%, up from 6%.

New beta changes, reported on MMO-Champion. Well, I guess that's a bad nerf to Guardian of Ancient Kings, but was it necessary?

On a positive note, Sheath of Light received a slight buff.

kharen · 10/19/10, 7:02 AM

Originally Posted by Danath

New beta changes, reported on MMO-Champion. Well, I guess that's a bad nerf to Guardian of Ancient Kings, but was it necessary?

The final burst of damage as it expired was hitting for up to several hundred thousand, so yes. Last build buffed it massively, and they completely overdid it. This should bring it back down to more reasonable numbers.

On a positive note, Sheath of Light received a slight buff.

That would seem to indicate that the change in the conversion rate of melee hit rating that has been noticed on live (only needing ~246 to cap at 80) is intended and will carry over up to 85. Previously, capping melee hit gave you ~11% spell hit, so an additional 6% was enough to cap spells as well as melee, but on live, capped melee hit +6% leaves you somewhat short of capping spells.

saboya · 10/19/10, 9:01 AM

Originally Posted by Danath

New beta changes, reported on MMO-Champion. Well, I guess that's a bad nerf to Guardian of Ancient Kings, but was it necessary?

Yes it was necessary, the final damage output was insane, it could probably one-shot anyone in PvP, although I did not test it. I don't have the numbers but I'm pretty sure I was topping the charts on the beta raid tests I was in because of it.

chippydip · 10/19/10, 1:47 PM

Interesting question: The 2pT11 prot bonus is +10% CS damage. How does this compare to our 4p bonus? Under completely ideal conditions our 4pT11 is worth an extra TV every 60 second (possibly at the cost of a filler) if you use only 1 HP Inquisitions to maximize the benefit. If you use 3hp Inq to get a 40 second duration then the bonus is worth a TV every 120 second (half the "optimal" benefit) but you might get more fillers due to Inq every 40 instead of every 20. My super-quick napkin math seems to indicate that the benefits would be in the same ballpark.

If detailed calculations put the prot bonus ahead we might have to start looking at a hybrid gearing setup (or letting Blizzard know so they can fix this). A couple of the prot pieces actually have a bit more Str on them than the ret pieces, though at a cost of combat ratings obviously.

On a somewhat related note, as epics start dropping on beta I find myself pretty apathetic as to the specific stats on an item with the new itemization changes. If its plate with strength then its probably a good upgrade. Ideally it seems good to try to avoid tank pieces and, to a lesser extent, dps pieces with mastery, but even then its not a huge disadvantage to use either of those if its an ilvl upgrade. As WoW is a game focused on getting those leet purpz I'm a bit disappointed, but at least the new encounters are cool

Nätion · 10/19/10, 2:08 PM

Looking at it from a 120 second window, taking full advantage of 4pc yields 2 TV at the probable cost of 2 fillers vs. 1 TV without the cost of a filler. So it would come down to a TV vs 2 fillers. I believe sub-20% 3pt Inq would win out. as wasted fillers would probably be more powerful

phillipaug · 10/20/10, 7:45 AM

The rebuke seal proc was fixed?
Is it suppose to be a bug?

Zalinda · 10/20/10, 8:58 AM

It would have been bad implementation if it wasn't a bug.

If we were to assume it WASN'T a bug, then the idea would be that we are balanced around rebuking every 10sec for the extra damage. This in turn would mean that Rebuke isn't a choice talent but required to reach our balanced DPS. It also means we can't use Rebuke as an actual interrupt as it's part of our DPS rotation and delaying it would mean a reduction in our dps.

It's the same line of reasoning why blizzard ended up changing how HoR worked compared to initial implementation and only make it do damage when the target is actually tauntable.

Following the same line of reasoning, you can also infer that the Censure DoT ticking speed is a bug. With some nifty seal twisting and proc watching you could end up having haste make a serious change in DPS done, this can't possibly be intended.
-> Start with SoR, pop a speed pot prior to the pull, judge for the haste buff, wait for a haste trinket proc (hope it procs before speed pot runs out), and only if all of the right things happen start wth SoT to have Censure ticking at the fastest possible speed for the entire duration of the fight (asuming you can keep it going). You can probably even find some more stuff to add onto this for even more (temporary) haste that then keeps being applied.

Edit: You could even use the level 60 BWL pala trinket (Scrolls of Blinding Light - Item - World of Warcraft) which has an OnUse haste proc (I'm not sure if there's newer/better ones with an onuse haste) prior to the pull and swap to a better trinket for the rest. This isn't the sort of things blizzard tend to like. Expect a change, though it may take them a while.

Edit2: have a backup weapon, enchanted with black magic, use that on the pull and hope it procs before the speedpot and onuse trinket runs out.

Exemplar · 10/20/10, 10:51 AM

When was Rebuke fixed? Does someone have a log? My log from last evening shows mixed results (Rebuke may or may not be proccing, or doing so some portion of the time). Something simple like only using Rebuke on a training dummy should display accurate info.