alhill

One thing I am curious about in WOTLK is whether deep demo locks will still be running around in two piece t5. The health link scales perfectly and could theoretically be used for many expansions to come. If Blizzard does not provide similar gear with the same function, deep demo locks may find t5 to be superior even taking into account the inferior stats.

Same issue with mage 2 piece t5, actually, which also scales perfectly, particularly if arcane at some point in the future becomes the "it" build for mages, like fire is now. I'm sure there's some other sets that may also have useful and scaleable bonuses at a relatively low "number of pieces of gimp gear" cost.

I know some of the old pre-BC raiding sets had useful and scaleable bonuses, but none of the best bonuses were available at a cost of only two pieces. I am interested to see what happens in the expansion with some of these raiding sets.

 

gunit12

I was considering regemming my gear from spell dmg/crit gems to pure spell dmg gems, but am worried about my spell crit... will it be too low? Also any other general gearing tips would be appreciated. My guild is just starting the first few bosses in MH and BT.

http://www.wowarmory.com/character-s...Staghelm&n=Kut

 

Idk

Well, one could argue that the old 3-piece set bonuses of T1/T2 (out of 8 total pieces) are synonymous with the 2-piece bonuses of T4/T5/T6 (out of 5 total pieces). Many of the bonuses from those sets were changed.. the one I can think of right off the bat is T2 druid 3-piece being changed from +15% mana regen while casting to a static 20 mp5.

There's a chance that they'll keep the set bonuses around but I highly doubt it. I think Blizzard made a strong effort to ensure that no piece of pre-TBC equipment would be irreplaceable in the expansion. There are a few items from pre-TBC that continue to be useful (I'm looking at you, BWL trinkets) but I don't think that any of them are necessary/irreplaceable.

Just my .02.

 

Flamingcloud

It is gonna take some mighty powerful items to offset 4pc t6 for a destro lock. Belt/Bracer/Shoulder/Boot together takes about 32% of your item budgeting(and result in much less than 32% of your final stats..) So for an item to overtake those stats +6% increase on all stats(and base).. It might take items in those slots double the stats of each of those pieces.

 

Idk

I haven't seen any discussion about the changes to the MSD metagem.. so I put together some back of the envelope math.

Old MSD - chance to have the next spell cast at 50% cast time.

- Spreadsheet shows me getting a proc every 57.31s with my toon's 2.37s shadowbolt.
- This means 1 shadowbolt at 1.5s every 57.31s.
- You could call this a 36.7% haste buff for 1.5s (since we're currently capped by the GCD at 1.5s).
- 36.7% haste = 576 haste rating.
So 576 haste rating * (1.5 / 57.31) = average 15.1 haste rating over the 57.31 seconds.

New MSD - 4 sec buff of 320 haste.

- My 2.37s shadowbolt becomes a 1.87s shadowbolt.
- Assume the proc chance stays the same.. 15% chance, 45s cooldown.. still getting 1 proc every 57.31 seconds.
- However, since my new shadowbolt is 1.87s and the buff is a flat 4s, I can start 3 casts within that 4s window. 1.87 * 3 = 5.61s of effective buff.
- The new MSD buff is a confirmed 320 haste rating
So 320 haste rating * (5.61 / 57.31) = average 31.3 haste rating over the 57.31 seconds.

---

Is this the right way to calculate the value of the meta? I think there's great potential for this to be quite a bit better than the old one (despite the pissing and moaning from a huge chunk of the community)... I'm not sure it will outpace the CSD for destro locks but there's a very likely chance that it will be better for afflic and demo specced locks.

 

Krazen

Assuming you are chaincasting, it'll be very difficult to get 3 casts in that 4 second window, given that the proc will go off midcast a lot of the time.

 

Trickykid

The most accurate answers will come from the spreadsheet linked on the original post. The difference between those gems is very close so it depends not only on your gear but on your raid setup (to determine values on crit from ISB).

If they intend to stick with 8pc tiers with only 4pc bonuses... you could potentially have both. I imagine they would make a higher-piece bonus offset the drop in nuke buffage.

 

Idk

I've never had an MSD.. does the proc calculation happen when you begin casting or when you finish casting. I would assume the latter.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to be chaincasting shadowbolts as a destro lock. Presumably you could ensure that you always have 1200 mana so that if an MSD proc happens you have the mana for 3 straight shadowbolts. If you really wanted to ensure effective use of the meta, you could try to perform all of your tapping needs during the 45s "hidden cooldown" so that the meta never procs off a tap (meaning wasting part of the haste buff on a GCD).

I tried to calculate a haste rating number instead of a flat percentage increase because the value of haste rating can be scaled with the amount of tapping done within the 57s window. The more taps you perform within that window, the less the haste rating increases your personal DPS.

 

Akj

Basing lifetap efficiency on hp:mp ratio is a flawed concept and it is incredibly short sighted to think that this change does not hurt PvE. Offhand I can think of the following encounters where the ratio is out of whack.

- Leotheras demon form tanking in FR gear
- Capernian tanking in FR gear
- Bloodboil felrage (nobody lifetaps during felrage but just mentioning it for completeness)
- RoS phase 2
- Mother Shahraz in SR gear
- Illidan demon form tanking in SR gear
- Twin Eredar tanking (unconfirmed, going by videos on this one)

Its easy to say that the extra healing burden will be covered by HoTs & overhealing when all content is on farm. Imagine if there were a boss like Shahraz in sunwell, would you feel confident taking locks with a 2:1 hp to mp ratio in SR gear for a healing intensive fight with a mana burn component?

Hope Blizz can come up with a fair scaling mechanism on PTR soon.

 

Flamingcloud

Even if you got perfect world 3 cast every MSD proc, 31.3haste is significantly worse than CSD for destro still. Assuming your numbers are correct anyways.. Not to mention a much harder meta requirement imo(ie all red one blue, instead of mix of reds/yellows/blues)

 

Ammanas

There is no theoretical threshhold of crit or damage that you need to maintain, the fact is that at most realistic gear levels damage is point for point a better DPS stat than crit. When it comes to gem selection, you have complete control over what stats you are adding so there is no reason to ever take the inferior stat (crit) unless it is to obtain a socket bonus that ends up being better than a straight damage gem (IE: the T6 helm socket).

If you want to see how much of a DPS increase it would be to determine if its worth the time/money/effort, plug your current stats and then your new damage gem stats into the spreadsheet and see what you get. I ran with 19 paper doll crit for awhile when I first switched to 21/40 and was still out-DPSing the more conventional "destro needs crit" locks because they had gimped spell damage. As far as ISB contribution, crit rating has such a bad point to percent ratio that gemming for crit really is going to have a minimal impact on your ISB contribution.

 

Arelenda

What you're saying is true. No one should gimp their spellpower to get more crit. But at high gear levels, it's possible to get as much out of crit as spellpower. This is the case for me, I get about equal out of both.

 

richard

From the 2.4 changes topic: Lifetap now drains 5% of maximum health to return 15% of maximum mana.

This seems like a PvP buff to me, and a PvE nerf. A raiding warlock generally has about 10k mana so the return is just a flat 1.5k. The heavily reduced health cost is pretty strange, considering pretty much everyone thought it was being nerfed because of PvP, but 5% health is negligible most of the time.

 

Spoonman

It's a completely bizarre change, seeing as some blue (Eyonix maybe?) posted that they wanted warlocks to take a bigger hit for life-tapping in PvP. Either that was just a lie, or they changed their minds, or this new LT version is a bug. Personally, losing 600hp to gain 1.5k mana seems ridiculous.

 

Keyne

Half of these situations are ones where you are essentially the main tank, and thus have one or more healers focussing solely and completely on you. You can assume that whatever capacity your healers have for overhealing you wholely or partially mitigates your argument here. So I don't really put too much stock in this concern.

 

zerdell

I think you misunderstand the nature of warlock tanking. Warlocks are used to tank bosses in resist phases, stacking high fire / shadow / whatever resist gear. What this means is that the damage you take is quite bursty. You might completely resist 3 attacks in a row, then be hit by two for full damage. Given this, and given that you can't predict when this will happen, life tapping is extremely risky. Any change that makes you have to life tap more often, for more health lost is extremely risky.

 

Keyne

I understand that there is additional risk associated with more hurtful lifetaps, but my point remains that it is mitigated a lot by the fact that you are the center of the healers' attention.

 

Amonette

Life tap rank 1 : Coverts 5% of maximum health into 5% of maximum mana.
Life tap rank 2 : Coverts 12% of maximum health into 12% of maximum mana.
Life tap rank 3 : Coverts 20% of maximum health into 20% of maximum mana.

So all that feedback was for nothing. Stam still scales negatively. The last rank is bugged from what I can see, it gives only 15% mana.

 

Faldrath

Stam scales negatively, but it's not so bad as it was, at least for PvE. I'm destro, and I currently LT for 1626 (completely unbuffed numbers, 9806HP/8755MP). If it's 20%, I'll lose 1961 health but gain 1751 mana.

And, to be honest, in my experience, whenever I lifetap I usually get a renew and/or a lifebloom almost immediately in most fights. I imagine it'll be more crippling for PvP (which I don't really do), since there isn't much healing to spare, but for raiding locks this isn't too bad.

 

Eph

Also worth noting is that there are epic versions of the haste, haste/stm, haste/dmg gems. Looks like that'll lighten the load on spinel supplies as well as give us a slight dps increase.

 

Amonette

It will give all those lionseyes' in the guild bank a nice new home.

 

Dalus

My guild normally raids with 3 Warlocks (usually one of each spec) and 4-5 Melee DPS. (not including the 2-3 tanks.) The warlocks refuse to put up Curse of Recklessness up under any circumstances, claiming that the gain is too minor to be worth the additional damage risk to the tank and/or to be used instead of CoA/CoD. From what I can see with the numbers, this appears to be groundless. Are they correct, is CoR sub-optimal here, or are they just being stubborn?

(P.S. My guild is working on both Vashj and Kael ATM, everything else at that level is on farm, to give you an idea of the boss situations we'd use it for.)

 

Akj

You have pocket healers on Shahraz?

 

PSGarak

There's a thread on CoR and Amp/Damp magic over here When to use CoR, Amplify/Dampen Magic?
There's some empirical evidence that one fully talented Demo Shout will take a boss to zero AP, even with CoR up, which means that there is no drawback at all under those situations. If that is not the case, quite simply, it's not for the warlocks to decide on their own. If the tank/healers agree that they can take some additional damage without realistically increasing the chance of being insta-gibbed, then use CoR. 860 Armor Penetration on four to five melee will outdamage CoD, as long as the melee are assigned to the CoR target and pulling their weight.

http://sig.gamerdna.com/quizzes/INFL...erks/Garak.png

 

Morwen

I'd be quite happy with a 20%-20% rank as it basically brings lifetap to the same as it was at the T6 level before in terms of mana efficiency and opens the way for future scaling that separates efficiency and damage output. That was what quite a few people pointed out, so it can hardly be said that they didn't listen.