Remove Advertisements

Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Anything, including off-topic posts

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby tlitp » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:34 pm

Disclaimer : I'm interested in two specific instances, end-tier bosses on normal (e.g. Ragnaros in T12) and hard modes. The rest of the normal modes, plus LFR, are out.

1. Drawing the line, how good/bad was Cataclysm for the DPS role ? Refer to Brekkie's rant on DPS checks, and to my own on survivability checks.

2. I've seen attempts to justify ditching "true" DPS checks (again, refer to Brekkie's thread). I haven't seen attempts to justify ditching survivability checks. I'd be quite interested in getting some feedback on this particular issue, more so with one of the tools (i.e. resistance) going out-of-player-control in MoP.

A final disclaimer : please, do not mention the "fun factor". It tends to provoke a hard-enrage, as far as I'm concerned.
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby halabar » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:54 am

It appears that you only want answers from the clear-HM-in-first-5-weeks crowd, so I'm not even gonna touch this further.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 9379
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby theckhd » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:01 am

I would argue that DPS checks were frequent enough to make the DPS role quite important in Cata progression. I'm not sure which role has had the toughest job this expansion - DPS or healers. It sure as hell wasn't tanks, though.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7803
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby tlitp » Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:06 am

halabar wrote:It appears that you only want answers from the clear-HM-in-first-5-weeks crowd (...)

Nah. I'm merely interested in normalization (ceteris paribus, yada-yada). If you've cleared something (either end-tier bosses on normal, either HMs) up before the nerfs, that's good enough. Comparing (e.g.) SoD @15% to SoD @0% is pointless.

theckhd wrote:I would argue that DPS checks were frequent enough

How frequent is "frequent enough" ? Examples ? And how about those survivability "thresholds", did Cataclysm pack any of them ?
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby benebarba » Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:21 am

Do you have a more specific cutoff in mind? I.e. relative gear levels/nerf points, etc?

For T-11/12 which nerfs don't you want data past?
benebarba
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:30 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Cogglamp » Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:52 am

The only end boss that I did this tier prior to any major nerf was Normal Cho'gall. It certainly felt like a decent dps check but it mainly had to do with bursting down the adds quickly enough. If you could control the adds, the fight went well.

I'm definitely a run of the mill WoW player and that fight felt like it favored classes that could burst on the move and could switch quickly and maintain high dps. If you didn't have a Paladin tank to help with the interrupts via shield toss, dps definitely had to be aware of the Mind Control to help out as well as avoiding shadow crashes. The usage of personal cooldowns/raid cooldowns extended down to the roles of the dpsers during Phase 2.

Though my experience is limited, I thought it was a good check for dpsers in using all the available tools as it didn't feel like you could just brute force it with more heals/more tanks.

Not sure if that's what you wanted though. /shrug
Cogglamp
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:04 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Flex » Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:27 am

For my group it was pretty much 10% tank learning the fight, 30% healers learning the rhythm of the fight, 60% having the DPS output the required DPS while avoiding the things that will stress the healer.

Not moving out of the pillar on Magmaw fast enough, not using a damage reduction cooldown or kiting the slimes on omnitron, moving out of the group when target for chain lightning on Ascendant Council.

Survivability checks moved from the "have enough X to survive Y" to "avoid X to not drain the healers mana" which worked fine until Int scaling combined with Max mana returns and class changes neutered healing and we went to the "toss unavoidable AoE damage out there to make the healers heal."
We live in a society where people born on third base constantly try to steal second, yet we expect people born with two strikes against them to hit a homerun on the first pitch.
User avatar
Flex
 
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:29 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Shoju » Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:59 pm

For my group, DPS was the important part of the progression. I saw it from the tanking and DPSing perspective during raiding. During T11 our progress was slowed by DPS. Nef was killed as a guild later, because our DPS was rough during P2. Cho'gall was always risky because of DPS needs in the final phase.

In FL, I only DPS'd on H:ryo of the fights you would care about. DPs was INCREDIBLY important on that fight.

IN DS? ULtraxion DPS was far more important for our guild than Madness DPS, and we killed madness pre-scaling nerf. DPS needs on Madness is burst. Ultra was a high dps fight.

I would say that my time spent at dps, and improvements to my personal dps this tier have been more about timing my CD's, and Burst, and similar things. It's been important to know when to blow things up. And when it's time to blow it up, you better be going balls to the wall.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby theckhd » Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:29 pm

tlitp wrote:
theckhd wrote:I would argue that DPS checks were frequent enough

How frequent is "frequent enough" ? Examples ? And how about those survivability "thresholds", did Cataclysm pack any of them ?

As in, well over half of the bosses. In Dragon Soul, I think the only boss that doesn't have a hefty DPS requirement as part of the encounter is Morchok. Even at 10% debuff levels, some of them could be challenging. The ones we faced at 0% were all tight enrage or enrage kills, and success hinged on having DPS on the right targets at the right times.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7803
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Meloree » Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:43 am

tlitp wrote:Disclaimer : I'm interested in two specific instances, end-tier bosses on normal (e.g. Ragnaros in T12) and hard modes. The rest of the normal modes, plus LFR, are out.

1. Drawing the line, how good/bad was Cataclysm for the DPS role ? Refer to Brekkie's rant on DPS checks, and to my own on survivability checks.


Cataclysm was generally good for the DPS role as far as DPS checks go. There were multiple high-DPS check bosses. I can't think of a single survivability check (one where there was a reward for gearing/glyphing/speccing anything but max DPS).

To name some of the fights where there was a substantial hard DPS check, though (25H only): Cho'gall, Al'akir, Ascendant Council, Maloriak, and Nefarian from T11 all stand out as having some hard DPS checks (not necessarily the whole fight, but certainly various critical points in the fight) that took work to overcome, or dictated raid setup to some degree.

In T12, Beth'tilac had an interesting interaction between DPS and healing in P2, the DPS check was high (but a soft check, good raid cooldown usage/planning or good raid setup gave the DPS extra time), Baleroc is almost the definition of a hard DPS check (pre-nerf), and Ragnaros had more than one hard DPS check.

In T13, virtually every fight had high DPS checks of one form or another. Zon'ozz and Yor'shaj were both post-enrage kills, Ultraxion was a very hard DPS check.

On the other hand, I don't think any of the fights quite measured up to M'uru (from Brekkie's post), as far as that style of DPS check goes.
Meloree
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1420
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:15 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Meloree » Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:45 am

I lied - there were a couple of survivability checks. There were a few T11 fights where we encouraged DPS to wear Mirror of Broken images. Al'akir, mostly. We thought about it on Nefarian and Council, but ended up going with pure DPS. It didn't come up in T12/T13.
Meloree
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1420
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:15 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Winkle » Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:17 am

Personally i agree with Theck. In general the expansion has been good for DPS with potentially DPS being the most difficult/challenging role.

Aren't DPS checks completely subjective though? Either you or your raid group can produce the goods are you can't. If you can then you don't feel challenged if you can't then you do...perhaps to the point of frustration?

At the end of the day the community as a whole now has a very good understanding of the game to the point where maximum possible DPS can be calculated and achieved by the best players. Since Blizzard are unlikely to create an unkillable boss (in terms of possible dps vs enrage) then creating a DPS check becomes very hard.

Fights like ultraxion, spine, etc can be sighted as DPS checks, but then again they were killed at 0% so for some they effectively were no harder than morchok in terms of DPS.

Perhaps if Muru was re-releaed in T14 it wouldn't be seen as much as challenge as it previously did.

The demise of the strict DPS check then opens up or even requires the introduction of other mechanics (e.g. survivability checks) to challenge the highest end DPS.

However surely fights like Rag 25 HC (0%) were also survival checks? Most guilds killed it with 3 healers, with a good degree of raid wide damage throughout the fight I'm sure that DPS survival wasn't trivial.
Winkle
 
Posts: 591
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby tlitp » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:00 am

Alright, thanks for the feedback. Very interesting so far.

1. Did Cataclysm pack any encounters where DPS went for unorthodox specs/glyphs ? Mel already said that it wasn't the case, but (e.g.) Rogues had to do it for V&T. Any other such occurrences ?

2. Did Cataclysm pack any encounters where getting DPS blown up early in the fight meant (a call for) a wipe ? You know, stuff like original Loatheb or Archimonde.

3. Did Cataclysm pack any encounters with (almost) no room for error recovery, as far as DPS goes ? See Rogues on Reliquary - you did it right, or you didn't do it at all.

4. Were there encounters which almost made you think "not going to happen; not now, not tomorrow, not anytime soon" ? Stuff like Alone in the Darkness (or the "bugged" Ouro*/C'thun/Solarian/Vashj, which I've actually experienced myself), brick walls at their finest.


* Speaking of Ouro, that has to be my personal favourite. C'thun, for instance, did give you the impression that "it won't happen", pretty much upfront. Ouro seemed more manageable... and we kept queuing wipe after wipe on that bugger. On the other hand, it was a major disappointment after the (several months late) hotfix.
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby benebarba » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:47 am

tlitp wrote:1. Did Cataclysm pack any encounters where DPS went for unorthodox specs/glyphs ? Mel already said that it wasn't the case, but (e.g.) Rogues had to do it for V&T. Any other such occurrences ?

2. Did Cataclysm pack any encounters where getting DPS blown up early in the fight meant (a call for) a wipe ? You know, stuff like original Loatheb or Archimonde.


I've only DPS'd one boss in your cutoff, and well after it was current (Rag), so for what it's worth:

1.) Glyphed holy wrath (not sure if this is optimal for ret or not.) on Rag. I'd imagine glyphed DP shows up in some DS fights as well (ultraxion soaks? Only tanked normal ultrax... no idea what the DPS were doing).

2.) Again, sons on rag make a loss of more than a couple DPS make it tough to get them before they make it to the hammer, let alone also downing the Scions beating on the tanks after the second transition. Normal ultrax seemed to have this as well, but at least here you could spend b-rezzes on them assuming your tank(s) weren't messing up soaks and swaps.
benebarba
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:30 am

Re: Summa summarum : DPS role in Cataclysm

Postby Flex » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:54 am

Our survival hunter went with a different spec for Bethtilac, extra stam and rooting on trap trigger.
2 and 3 completely depends on the group. Most of our first kills could not be completed without everyone executing the fight to near perfection. If 3 is related to DPS players doing a non-standard DPS function I'm not pulling one of those off the top of my head.
We live in a society where people born on third base constantly try to steal second, yet we expect people born with two strikes against them to hit a homerun on the first pitch.
User avatar
Flex
 
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:29 am

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Remove Advertisements

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
?php } else { ?