I'm very disappointed about the rupture change. Mostly, this is for pvp- making 20% of our damage depending on a dot is brutal. There's also a lot of restrictions coming in on HAT- gotta be unstealthed, gotta be in combat (the new one), and of course gotta have people critting stuff. Is HAT really in need of this lockdown?
I suspect the REASON behind the change is to make sub rogues need to rupture when we are raiding. I'm getting a bit disappointed about Blizzard being unwilling to making rupture worth pressing. How rough would it be to simply make it do more actual damage than eviscerate if the debuff runs its full duration? That hardly seems unreasonable, and at this phase of balancing with percentages flipping this way and that, it seems the right time to invest in a rupture we can just want to press, without the small-joint manipulation that they are currently doing (ok, so, like, if you DON'T do it, lose 20% of your damage, or lose a lot of your regen).
Not that it's very important, but this also makes soloing weak mobs harder, as now you want to open them with garrote or something? Speaking of, it would rock if garrote was non-positional now more than ever.
Talk about making preparation even more mandatory than it already is.
A 9 second (or nearly) stun isn't unprecedented, though. Revealing strike kidney currently performs the same function, and doesn't require a significant cooldown use in order to trigger it. Depending on how dynamic pvp is, they may leave a 7-9 second CS in the game. It would be useful while leveling and would push pvp more towards resets than today's supertrain model.
CS Stun has been changed from +5 Secs to +1 Secs in the current Beta Build, so yeah. Also an increase in Hemo's DoT component so it's likely that much of the finer details of Sub's mechanics in particular are still being fleshed out. I would expect another Rupture change soon, in whatever way.
Looks like pretty much all of the old fast offhand weapons (including TBC/WotLK era swords and axes) were changed to 1.8, though [Grasscutter] is still 1.6 (checked on the vendor in Dalaran), probably just an oversight.
Crimson Tempest bleed is also included in Sanguinary Vein now. While it's a welcome buff for AoE, I still think that bringing back what essentially is a Hunger for Blood clone is a stupid design decision. The Cataclysm overhaul was supposed to lower our passive damage output, and now one expansion later that direction is pretty much reversed.
So, just out of my own curiousity, I just tested combat potency procs versus weapon speed with main gauche-sourced procs.
As I'm sure everyone is aware, the tooltip says that combat potency has a proportionately increased chance to proc based on offhand weapon speed, so my curiosity was whether or not Main Gauche-sourced procs were based on off-hand weapon speed, main hand weapon speed, or completely independent of weapon speed in either hand.
So, to test, I spammed revealing strike, sinister strike, and eviscerate on a level 85 practice dummy, turned 90 degrees so no autoattacks happen. I did this with 4 combinations of weapons, for approximately 20 minutes each (first number is MH weapon speed).
Standard caveat that this is beta and it may change applies. I will of course retest closer to release. Cursory appearance is that the chance for combat potency to trigger from main gauche attacks is related to the main hand speed, although I'd rather have a longer test to be more certain. This makes intuitive sense given that combat is going to want a slow main hand, and hence will have fewer main gauche procs.
I assume that with shadow blades together with extra poisondmg that at least with the 4pc bonus, all speccs is mandatory to have spellhit cap?
In MOP the special hit cap will be 7.5%. As always, that is mandatory. However, expertise also counts towards the spell hit cap above 7.5% and so I think it will be more or less mandatory to cap both for all three specs. Once you are at 7.5% hit and 7.5% expertise, you should be special-capped, spell hit-capped, and dodge-capped.
We're still not close to knowing whether we'll actually want hit and/or expertise for any given spec, however.
EDIT2: I didn't know poisons were being moved to spell hit table when I wrote this. The useful part of the post is this: it's possible we may not seek to cap hit or expertise, depending on the spec, as something like crit or mastery may be better. With that in mind, even the ability to cap stats may not come up for all three of our specs.
I put the original post in a spoiler tag.
← Click Here
Assuming that spell hit is really important for a spec (say, mutilate), you would probably value both up to their 7.5 caps, because adding either will give you your spell hit AND give you either -dodge or +hit (depending). If you have hit at 7.0 and expertise at 8.0, that will eliminate your spell miss, but that's not as optimal as 7.5 and 7.5 for each, because in the second case you could still miss (.5%) and half a percent of the expertise is being diminished.
However, pretend a spec doesn't really care about spell miss, and just gets a lot of benefit out of crit and haste (say, sub). In this case, sub could reforge away from hit and expertise both.
In other words, the benefit you get from each stat will determine whether you try to cap out your two hit stats (7.5% hit and 7.5% expertise, each granting 7.5% spell hit), or whether you go straight for other stats.
EDIT: It is of note that expertise and hit will have the exact same stat weights, so if you think one is great, the other will be equally great, up to the soft cap (7.5%).
As an aside, I personally prefer it when soft capped hit stats are superior when combined with a mastery that can be gamed based on fight mechanics, because that generates one of the very few cases where reforging becomes anything besides a chore. As an example, take mutilate- you like to cap spell hit, and mastery is your favorite uncapped stat. If a fight involved ludicrous amounts of aoe, you might prefer mastery even over hit rating, by a small amount. Or pretend combat had a mastery that did something interesting instead of being a reward for staying on a single target- say it increased the rate of return on restless blades, or the duration of killing spree and AR, or both. In that case, you could again find yourself deciding to favor that stat over your expertise (or in the future, expertise/hit), based on the ability to game it (say a fight has phases where you want to burn, and the extra mastery helps that or something). Normally reforging is correct or incorrect, and stat caps (with the ability to sacrifice them for some other thing) are interesting.
That's still up in the air. Back when it was released, several people (myself included) felt that he likely meant "rogue poisons will also use melee crit chance." It hadn't been covered anywhere before, it's a departure from current mechanics, and it was a section discussing crit. He had also just gotten done describing how melee spell hit would involve expertise.
Or maybe it's not up in the air, because we have beta access. Some input would be appreciated from anyone who's tinkered with it. That watercooler shouldn't be taken as gospel, though. Melee spell miss as a mechanic only applies to rogues, enhancement shaman, and to a tiny degree ret paladins; having the entire section describing how they interact would seem like overkill if he was only talking about enhancement shaman.
Did a short test in the current beta build, and it looks like poison is still on the spell hit table. 777 hit rating (+7.58% hit chance, which should take yellow misses off the hit table), zero expertise, no talents, Deadly Poison, and autoattacking the boss dummy in Undercity. In about a minute and a half, I had four Deadly Poison misses, which should indicate that poisons are still on the spell hit table.