[Ret 5.2 MoP] Retribution Concordance (RetCon) - Who ordered the Mogu'gai Panda? - Page 25

Belatar · 01/16/13, 4:06 AM

Well, maybe GC is getting the reason wrong why "pallys love DS". I can only speak for myself of course, but the reason why I indeed like DS better than the other AE (!) spells is, that

1) it has 10y range AND
2) you don`t need a target in melee range in front of you to make it work

The most annoying thing for me in AE situations, especially with lots of low HP adds that die quickly is, that often enough your target dies before you can get in range to use that mexo or HotR, or somebody pulls aggro and the target moves away or there is random aggro.... for that reason I even started using macros for all my AE spells with /targetenemy [noexists] which is quite ridiculous but the only way to not loose further dps of our already weak and very conditional AE to targeting issues.
With all my mouseover Holy macros I am around thirty macros for my pally alone and could use some more slots.

mexo: Needs to be glyphed, target in melee range in front of you, losing single target dmg for not being able to use exo at range
hotr: Only on target in melee range in front of you
LH: Talent, inferior on single target, 1 min CD, static on the floor, with the amount of movement necessary in fights rarely hits all targets and/or with all ticks

So, any way they are doing this 4pc I would like some kind of effect best that buffs our next TV or DS (our choice what we use/need next).
Generally if I could choose I would slightly prefer a buff to sustained single target, closely followed by less targeting issues and more range in AE, maybe together with a slight buff to SoR for a small buff in AE damage. Only daydreaming...
Or maybe 4pc bonus that makes AE spells refresh SoT on all targets that are hit? Multi-dot pallys ftw, but would probably kill LH... hmmm, not really an option.

Exemplar · 01/16/13, 9:00 AM

DS has a nice animation. It's pretty. People like pretty. Thus Ret love DS. It's certainly shinier than TV. Or it would be if I could see it through all the spell effects surrounding any target (am I in a fire? I don't know, I can't even see my damn toon!). Melee range is visual hell.

But enough fatuous reply to fatuous Blue post. My new worry - response time. Everyone remember how we've twice had set bonuses which caused a proc that occurred a full GCD after the generating attack?

I dread the following sequence: I perform a CS. I have 3+HP and nothing else to cast. I hit TV. The buff for DS procs (from the CS cast 1.5+ seconds ago). Damn it, I should have done DS, but I had no way of knowing.

We need instant responsiveness on this (which is possible - we've had it on some tiers... just not others).

Also DS+TV is significantly less damage than TV+TV+smidge. In order for the DS+Lightning to match the all-Holy TV, the lightning will need to do roughly 3 times DS damage (4DS ~= 2TV). Referencing TV at all in their discussion was a bad idea. I'm sure they'll make the lightning proc what it needs to be, it's just that it will be clear that number does not closely match TV.

Finally, X% proc chance? That means it could be more/less than 40%? Less and we'll really be RNG monkeys praying for the rare uber-damage proc (the less often it hits, the harder each hit must be to reach same average). More and we won't have much priority change - we'll be expecting to DS as the default. Why turn two tuning knobs (frequency and damage) at the same time? Why even have the random chance? Flat make it CS will cause your next DS (within X seconds) to proc lightning for Y damage. It's sufficient shakeup. If you have a CS in the window, you do the DS. If no CS, you do the TV. With expected 100% conversion the proc can be lower damage (100% chance of X damage vs 40% chance of Y damage means X can be 60%(!!) lower than Y). This ever so coincidentally could also means you'd use the TV rather than waiting for a CS to do another DS - the margins could be small enough that the empty GCD is the greater evil.

P.S. Blizzard pointedly reworks rotation/priority only once an Xpac. They do this to cause enough change to be interesting. Their expert opinion is rework more frequently than that causes confusion and mental anguish for the less hardcore players. So why the hell add tier bonuses that cause rotation/priority changes? Joe 'No Theorycrafting' Average is the one to suffer as he uses DS without procs or TV with procs because he doesn't use mods (Auras, clcInfo, etc) to hold his hand and tell him what button to press (not to disparage the mods, I use them, but they do make it easier to play (insert 'mods are required to get anywhere/no they're not' argument here)).

anafielle · 01/16/13, 9:32 AM

Also DS+TV is significantly less damage than TV+TV+smidge. In order for the DS+Lightning to match the all-Holy TV, the lightning will need to do roughly 3 times DS damage (4DS ~= 2TV).

I've seen this complaint a lot (I probably made it myself) out of almost everyone in the thread... and I am coming to the conclusion that it's a not fair argument.

We are discussing just bare bones mechanics here. The devs had not even come close to number tuning. I wonder if our opinion here was too heavily biased by the original set bonus which was very obviously not going to go live at the strength we had theorized it. The devs aren't just going to let some ability be overpowered because it's holy damage. They didn't alter it to nerf us, it is supposed to be X strength and they've just picked a different mechanic to hand us a bonus. If the original set bonus was really that strong, it is much more likely that either we or the blues were theorizing something wrong about how it was going to work - and it wasn't going to go live like that.

There are so many other productive things to dislike about the new set bonus, but "It's less strong than the old one" is not an argument that I think holds a lot of water. Particularly since we, in this thread, were hating on the old set bonus because it was SO strong that its procs were going to provide huge DPS swings!

Cartavian · 01/16/13, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by anafielle

I've seen this complaint a lot (I probably made it myself) out of almost everyone in the thread... and I am coming to the conclusion that it's a not fair argument.

We are discussing just bare bones mechanics here. The devs had not even come close to number tuning. I wonder if our opinion here was too heavily biased by the original set bonus which was very obviously not going to go live at the strength we had theorized it. The devs aren't just going to let some ability be overpowered because it's holy damage. They didn't alter it to nerf us, it is supposed to be X strength and they've just picked a different mechanic to hand us a bonus. If the original set bonus was really that strong, it is much more likely that either we or the blues were theorizing something wrong about how it was going to work - and it wasn't going to go live like that.

There are so many other productive things to dislike about the new set bonus, but "It's less strong than the old one" is not an argument that I think holds a lot of water. Particularly since we, in this thread, were hating on the old set bonus because it was SO strong that its procs were going to provide huge DPS swings!

I almost had the same thought in the beginning that perhaps our ideas about the new change to DS were too heavily influenced by what we initially thought the TV bonus was going to be. But I don't think that is the case now. Our expectation about the theoretical damage this DS lightning should do is reasonably based around what a 4pc set bonus should give any dps class.

Honestly not a whole lot really changes here from the original TV design. You get a proc you hit a button. Its just that now you hit the DS button instead.

anafielle · 01/16/13, 10:37 AM

Fair enough. Debating whether this bonus is strong enough for a 4 pc is fair, although I still think it's pretty unproductive until we see the numbers. I am just really trying hard not to compare it to the old design.

I just think a lot of us (me included) are totally hung up on the old design and our opinions are biased by this not very relevant feel that we got nerfed. I'm the first to admit it, I thought the holy damage design was really neat sounding and I obviously miss it. But I am trying to get beyond this and measure the new bonus on its own merits.

My problem with the "new bonus" has to do with strength, I am just having a different conceptual problem with it. TV is our finishing move. We are supposed to get that WHAM hard-hitting spell feeling from building up our holy power and spending it on this big nuke. Obviously in reality, paladins don't really play like that, since we have other hard-hitting nukes like proc Exo and Hammer, and TV is a low priority for us. But this is the feeling which I always thought TV was supposed to have, and that is why I find that a proc which replaces it is very awkward. Witness billions of bad paladins whining every time they have to refresh inquisition. Giving it up for a stronger spell is one thing, but giving it up for DS ... which is a very lackluster spell right now... just feels wrong.

But I guess I will wait until I'm wearing it and practicing on a PTR target dummy to come to a real conclusion. But I'm skeptical -- that lightning bolt better hit like a fucking truck to make that playstyle change feel anything other than really strange.

I guess I just care a lot about the ret rotation, since I enjoy doing it. I also am NOT one of those paladins who has ever enjoyed DS, I think it's a terrible spell and I am rolling my eyes that anyone wants to cast it more. But hey, it's just my opinion. / shrug

Cartavian · 01/16/13, 10:49 AM

This was just posted this morning:

•New Ret 4pc reads in totality (i.e. there is no mention of Templar's Verdict): "Your Crusader Strike and Hammer of the Righteous have a X% chance to cause your next Divine Storm to also strike its primary target with a Lightning Bolt for Y Nature damage." Y is about a Templar's Verdict.

So from what they are saying here the lightning bolt proc is about equal to a TV, meaning the only real bonus we get for the 4pc on single target is the equivalent to an extra DS (100% weapon damage as holy damage + the 2pc bonus) when we would normally cast TV. To put it another way, this 4pc bonus would proc a DS on your TV. That seems extremely lackluster to me.

Makes me wonder if a valor point upgraded heroic 2pc bonus from the current tier (15% bonus TV damage) + the tier 15 2pc would be worth it over the t15 4pc?

Hamsda · 01/16/13, 10:53 AM

I think both versions of the 4pc had their advantages and disadvantages.

The full holy TV would obviously have a very nice "KAPOW"-feeling to it, as anafielle described, whereas the lightning DS reminds me more of the ICC days. Even though blizz apparently doesn't mind some single target spells having a bit of cleave damage as well, the newer version of the 4pc just feels weird, but again: that's just opinions.

The damage aspect really isn't that much of a problem. They can tune the lightning to be as strong as the difference between a normal TV and the buffed TV. But I think the TV implementation had one clear advantage: It would differenciate a good from a bad ret a bit better because those buffed TVs would've required a better inq management.

On the other hand the lightning implementation also means a little more damage during aoe situations, because it proccs off of HotR and obviously buffs the aoe finisher.

We'll see if the devs change their mind again...

anafielle · 01/16/13, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Hamsda

On the other hand the lightning implementation also means a little more damage during aoe situations, because it proccs off of HotR and obviously buffs the aoe finisher.

I don't think this adds any AOE damage at all. Think about it. If there is worthwhile cleave going on, we would have been casting DS anyways.

The only change is:
-- We would cast DS in a single target situation.
-- We would cast DS in a "please focus skull" situation where there happen to be more targets around. In other words, it adds meter fluffing.

Since the 4pc proc itself, the bonus damage, is single-target, this adds nothing to actual AE damage.

Hulabaloon · 01/16/13, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by anafielle

I don't think this adds any AOE damage at all. Think about it. If there is worthwhile cleave going on, we would have been casting DS anyways.

It adds the value of approximately 1 TV every time we cast DS with the proc. Not much, but given how pathetic our AoE is anyway, every little helps.

SirJim · 01/16/13, 1:34 PM

Originally Posted by Exemplar

Flat make it CS will cause your next DS (within X seconds) to proc lightning for Y damage. It's sufficient shakeup. If you have a CS in the window, you do the DS. If no CS, you do the TV.

That seems really bad if you think about it. First, those 3-4HP TVs will be in the long past, since it would seem way better to wait for the CS, to get the bonus. With CS having roughly a little below 4sec cd, while you "build" your 5HP TV,
you're 100% going to use CS at least once (when not under HA/SW). That would mean that TV gets replaced completely.

So, with our cds on HP generating abilites, which are ~4 for CS, ~5.5 for J and ~13.5 for exo (they vary cause of haste), building 5HP would mean that we would most likely get to use CS twice. So a proc chance even over 50% would be us saying goodbye to TV, and only use it during SW/HA. And if it hits as hard as you guys suggest, then in SW the rotation will propably become HoW-CS-HoW-TV/DS, and in HA the rotation will be CS-DS/TV-filler-TV-CS-DS/TV-filler-TV and so on.

I am really not a fan of this idea. I like my DS, but i also like my TV, and i would like to be able to use it in the next patch too. So instead of making DS proc a TV, make TV proc a DS. So no big changes in single target fights. Things would change in AoE fights though, but let's face it. Nobody cares about AoE fights. It would also be easy to balance. Make it hit really hard on first target, and then hit less and less as it strikes more targets. And it would be cooler too. (Procing a lightning bolt out of spin <<< procing a chain lighting out of a strike)

anafielle · 01/16/13, 1:56 PM

OK, I think I see what you mean. If you are cleaving, the 4pc adds the value of 1 TV to our primary target. I just misunderstood because it doesn't actually add any damage to the off-targets.

Edit: All of these alternate suggestions are just convincing me against my will that the dev implementation is right.

If you put the 4pc onto TV, or if you make the proc so high that it is pretty much always up, well, that is completely counter to the entire reasoning the devs have for changing it. They want us to adjust our behavior in response to a proc. Anything which leads to zero rotation change is counter to their purpose.

Cartavian · 01/16/13, 3:55 PM

With all the talk of AoE it seems like a lot of you are missing how weak this is for single target. Effectively its just a bonus100% weapon damage as holy damage proc for single target. Of couse it does benefit from the 2pc bonus but it still seems quite weak for a 4pc set bonus which is why I am curious if a valor point upgraded heroic 2pc from this tier (15% bonus TV damage) would end up doing more damage for single target. The 4pc unquestionably would benefit an AoE encounter more.

SirJim · 01/16/13, 4:03 PM

The idea is nice. It brings more flavour on the table. But the way it's executed is bad. A good way to execute it, would be to remove that stupid lightning, and make CS and HotR proc a free DS. It will feel right cause we won't be spending HP on DS, it will be actually adding a new ability in the rotation, not swapping abilites around, it won't make the paladin think that DS is his hard hitting finisher, and it will give us the boost in AoE that we need.

Edit: Comparing 14T 2piece with the current 15T 4piece.
the 15T 4piece is a DS plus a proc that equals a TV. DS dmg is roughly a little more than half of a normal TV. The 14T 2piece adds 15% dmg to our TV. 15/50=0.3, so if the proc chance on 15 4piece is 30%, the bonuses are equal. Any more than 30% makes the 15T 4piece better. And that's all without even considering the 15T 2piece. So i dont think that even a hc 2/2 upgraded 14T 2piece can make it in our 15T gear.

Ravicana · 01/16/13, 4:22 PM

Originally Posted by Cartavian

With all the talk of AoE it seems like a lot of you are missing how weak this is for single target. Effectively its just a bonus100% weapon damage as holy damage proc for single target.

DS is a little over half as strong as TV; the previous iteration was worth ~87% of a TV. (To compare TV and DS directly, you have to consider that DS benefits from Inq, so it's actually doing 130% weapon damage, and TV is mitigated by armor, so it's doing closer to 275*.7 = 193% weapon damage.) So we're looking at a proc that's worth maybe 60% of a TV, instead of ~87% of a TV.

If it has the same 40% proc rate, and the lightning bolt is exactly as strong as a TV, it'll be weaker than the previous bonus by a decent margin. But the previous bonus was extremely strong, so there's plenty of room for it to still be pretty good. Numbers pending, though.

Exemplar · 01/16/13, 4:52 PM

Originally Posted by anafielle

Edit: All of these alternate suggestions are just convincing me against my will that the dev implementation is right.

If you put the 4pc onto TV, or if you make the proc so high that it is pretty much always up, well, that is completely counter to the entire reasoning the devs have for changing it. They want us to adjust our behavior in response to a proc. Anything which leads to zero rotation change is counter to their purpose.

Why?
T15 4 piece bonuses:
DK DPS - passive.
Balance Druid - passive.
Feral Druid - passive. Unsure of priority, so tiny chance it could alter, but doesn't sound likely.
Hunter - passive.
Mage - passive.
Monk DPS - passive. May cause more frequent something (a la our Judge can proc HP bonus).
Ret - active - requires you to press a different button than normal to get any benefit.
Spriest - passive.
Rogue - passive.
Elemental Shaman - passive.
Enhance Shaman - passive.
Warlock - passive (though that ember thing might cause more frequent... something).
Warrior - passive.

So why does the Ret tier have to cause priority change? The CS portion already does so (altering the desirability to use CS over other abilities). So our priority is 'shaken up' by wanting to use CS at times we currently do not, as well as DS at times we do not.

I have no doubt Blizzard can and will balance the numbers on Ret 4piece, regardless of the end mechanic they decide to implement (again, 100% proc rate means less damage necessary per proc to hit any value of X). I simply question why hoop jumping is necessary for one spec. They can implement it, I'll use it, and live with it. I just disagree that it is necessary that any modification of anyone's set bonus requires gameplay change.

I will lay out a reasonable argument why a set bonus should strongly avoid any such priority/rotation change - for any class. The average player isn't on the cutting edge of any current rotation/priority. They often make mistakes and press the 'wrong' button in a given situation, thus doing less DPS than they could. Now you give them a set bonus that changes what they've been practicing for months - it increases the 'wrong' button scenarios. Most of what used to be 'wrong' is still 'wrong', what used to be 'right' is now sometimes 'wrong', and some tiny portion of what used to be 'wrong' is now right (but still feels wrong based on the last few months gameplay). I will posit it's entirely possible that an average player could do less damage in 4piece than they would in otherwise equal-stat gear without the bonus.

If a class is 'too easy', or 'overpowered' because a priority/rotation is somehow 'too simple', then the solution is to fix the mechanics, not offer a set bonus used by many/most (but not all) players. If things are not 'too simple', but are 'just right', why would it make sense to make them more complicated?

Edit: Ravicana - the former bonus was worth about 112% of a TV. Not 87%.