Remove Advertisements

Holy pallies should never get kings - you should

All things related to the expansion

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis

Postby Elsie » Wed Oct 08, 2008 10:58 pm

Point 5. Threat is not an issue in WotLK. Yes, damage = threat, but a) threat isn't an issue in WotLK at the moment, b) Kings gives both threat and survivability and c) dead tanks do no threat (I know this is technically point b but it's such an important point that it needed mentioning twice).

Threat is not a visible issue yet in naxx. That does not imply it is not an issue as 1) it's beta and 2) fight mechanics could make it so. Even if you have no threat issues, there are complications that can arise in a fight to make it an issue. Never-the-less, it's always a concern, and thus must be accounted for.

EDIT: Kings is always 5 points for everyone. Ret pallys will be getting Imp BoM and Kings, Holy pallies who get it will also likely be getting imp BoW as well. No pally will have untalented blessings.

This is a basic principle of economics. The opportunity cost of Prot for each point of kings is effectively 1 higher since they are forced to give up sanctuary. This is not true of ret/holy since they are not forced into improved blessing of X. Thus, kings is effectively 6 talent points for protection since it forces the point in Sanctuary to be wasted.

I'll assume you agreed with me on points 1-3 and conclusions (of which I editted), so I feel safe in asserting you now agree holy should be the one with kings.
User avatar
Elsie
 
Posts: 3819
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Holy pallies should never get kings - you should

Postby Mishdorf » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:02 pm

Drathian wrote:
Mishdorf wrote: a little less confrontational.

Facepalm?

In any case, 3% mitigation is in a completely different world than 3% Spellcrit, which isn't even close to 3% increased healing.

I won't be picking up Kings just because you're telling me I'm stupid if I don't pick up Kings. Thanks for the free 5 points.

Edit: That said, the real reason I won't be taking it is that I have absolutely ZERO need to pick it up, as I'll be gauranteed to have it since we have a Ret paladin with 99% raid attendance and another Holy that'll be taking Kings anyway.

Like we need kings for 5-man/heroic content anyway.


Well your Holy pally is being overly generous and gimping themselves in the process.

We will not need kings for heroic content, but depending on the difficulty level of heroic dungeons, it may help us greatly.

What, pray tell, are you going to spend your extra five points on that is going to help your raid more than 1.5% extra healing on your main tank and more longevity for your healer?
Image

"mana efficiency is for people who aren't tanking enough mobs" - Knaughty
Mishdorf
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:11 pm

Postby Elsie » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:14 pm

What, pray tell, are you going to spend your extra five points on that is going to help your raid more than 1.5% extra healing on your main tank and more longevity for your healer?

6% spell mitigation, actually casting sanctuary for 3% mitigation, improved LoH oh-shit button, divine guardian raid utility, stun resistance (given anything stuns in this xpac), improved judgment for libram procs.

We will not need kings for heroic content, but depending on the difficulty level of heroic dungeons, it may help us greatly.

Heroic isn't that difficult. If anything the mana from Sanctuary will be more beneficial. Also the mitigation turns into more possible healer mp5 in such a small setting.
User avatar
Elsie
 
Posts: 3819
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Holy pallies should never get kings - you should

Postby Drathian » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:18 pm

Mishdorf wrote:
Drathian wrote:
Mishdorf wrote: a little less confrontational.

Facepalm?

In any case, 3% mitigation is in a completely different world than 3% Spellcrit, which isn't even close to 3% increased healing.

I won't be picking up Kings just because you're telling me I'm stupid if I don't pick up Kings. Thanks for the free 5 points.

Edit: That said, the real reason I won't be taking it is that I have absolutely ZERO need to pick it up, as I'll be gauranteed to have it since we have a Ret paladin with 99% raid attendance and another Holy that'll be taking Kings anyway.

Like we need kings for 5-man/heroic content anyway.


Well your Holy pally is being overly generous and gimping themselves in the process.

We will not need kings for heroic content, but depending on the difficulty level of heroic dungeons, it may help us greatly.

What, pray tell, are you going to spend your extra five points on that is going to help your raid more than 1.5% extra healing on your main tank and more longevity for your healer?


Gimping himself? Really?

Or realizing that his sacrifice in picking up Kings is far less relative to Prot's sacrifice?

I can't tell you how many tankadins walked into Kara wielding a Sun-Eater and held aggro fine, even against slightly overgeared DPSers...because of exorcism and Seal of Vengeance.

Those same tankadins didn't have a clue why they started losing aggro like MAD when they stepped in T5 content.

Threat will always be an issue. Maybe not now, you know--because it's Beta and everything, and because entry level raids don't stress TPS, or because specializations aren't finalized and neither are rotations so no one is putting out optimal DPS and therefore TPS, or even just because tank threat starts off amazing but DPS threat scales up insanely fast to the threat-cap.

The small amount of TPS-gain I'll get out the Seals of the Pure alone will completely out-weigh not getting Kings. Threat capped DPS'ers will limit the raid far more than a healer not getting a 1.5% healing increase and a smidgen more healing-sustainability. We're trailing behind warrior's as far as threat is concerned atm. Not taking a scaling talent will hurt our ability to scale up closer to them.

And of course, as already mentioned, I've already got Kings covered by my guildies.

As for heroics, the mana-gain will completely trump Kings.

Edit, again:

The funny thing is that I was fully prepared to grab Kings. But I had people come to ME, and tell me to focus on threat/mitigation and they'd cover the buff.

Combine that with your drivel and I'm definitely not picking it up now.
Last edited by Drathian on Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Drathian
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:01 am

Postby duruk » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:20 pm

olorin00 wrote:(and tanks are the ones that really need BoK)


Actually, my arcane mages and healing priests usually want BoK over BoW, as the increased spirit from BoK gives them more mana regen than BoW.

Oh, they'll have both if they can get them, but usually they want BoK first.
Duruk, EU-Khadgar - Lvl85 Paladin Tank.
duruk
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:14 am

Postby Fridmarr » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:21 pm

I still wouldn't call this thread appropriate, but seeing as how it hasn't spiraled into a flame fest yet and it's already on to the second page I'll leave it, but it's being watched.

To the point at hand, the obvious problem with prot pally being the one to get kings is that tanks will be missing a buff. Therefore someone else will have to get kings anyhow to get proper coverage. Ret might be the easiest, and his blessing of might can be given out by a DPS warrior anyhow.

Regardless, I think is more than fair for a build to not have kings. You list a a base prot build that excludes basic things like Guarded by the Light as not being necessary, yet you somehow think kings is. You don't max out Shield of the Templar but yet you drop a point into stoicism. I think, I'd be far more critical of your build than someone's who didn't have kings. Yes I know you left out 9 points, but I think I could make the case that the talents you left out are no less mandatory than Kings.

At the end of the day, whether you like it or not, Kings isn't required, and folks who don't have it aren't stupid. You haven't made any sort of compelling cast to convince me otherwise.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9666
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Postby iliya » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:21 pm

Sorry, but no.

I'm not speccing Kings because you say so.
Iliya - Vek'Nilash: Retired
Image
iliya
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:38 am

Postby Kaienn » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:23 pm

Here's a guess... Talents that increase your threat output?

http://wotlk.wowhead.com/?talent=sVZ0xVA0uGteIRGots

That is my talent spec for 80.

Seals of the pure increases SoV/SoR dmg, therefore resulting in more threat.
Heart of the Crusader increases critical strike chance on all attacks therefore increasing the maximum threat I can have on a target.

Baseline threat + mitigation is not something to be skipped unless you overgear the encounters, and we will not overgear encounters in WotLK.
Image
User avatar
Kaienn
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:56 pm

Postby Mishdorf » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:24 pm

Elsie wrote:
Point 5. Threat is not an issue in WotLK. Yes, damage = threat, but a) threat isn't an issue in WotLK at the moment, b) Kings gives both threat and survivability and c) dead tanks do no threat (I know this is technically point b but it's such an important point that it needed mentioning twice).

Threat is not a visible issue yet in naxx. That does not imply it is not an issue as 1) it's beta and 2) fight mechanics could make it so. Even if you have no threat issues, there are complications that can arise in a fight to make it an issue. Never-the-less, it's always a concern, and thus must be accounted for.

EDIT: Kings is always 5 points for everyone. Ret pallys will be getting Imp BoM and Kings, Holy pallies who get it will also likely be getting imp BoW as well. No pally will have untalented blessings.

This is a basic principle of economics. The opportunity cost of Prot for each point of kings is effectively 1 higher since they are forced to give up sanctuary. This is not true of ret/holy since they are not forced into improved blessing of X. Thus, kings is effectively 6 talent points for protection since it forces the point in Sanctuary to be wasted.

I'll assume you agreed with me on points 1-3 and conclusions (of which I editted), so I feel safe in asserting you now agree holy should be the one with kings.


Well I could have picked apart these points a bit more, but chose to focus on the most obviously flawed parts.

So you are now arguing that Holy paladins and Ret paladins will NOT take the improved version of their spells?

Just because we have a mandatory talent in bosanc, does not alleviate the fact that we still need 25 points in the top five tiers. The absolutely 100% required skills by all prot paladins (not counting kings) only take up 19 of those points. That leaves 6 points that we NEED to take in those first five tiers. The only other skill in those tiers which will make a real, definitive difference in 99% of cases to a prot paladin is imp devo aura. So you have three points that are effectively being put into either kings or a flavour talent.

So the opportunity cost of kings is really only two talent points due to the construction of the tree. Three if our 11 point talent turns into a "must have".

On the threat topic - we have been assured by devs that threat should not be an issue in the expansion. Even if it is, not taking kings only gives two more free threat talent points.

1. Yes, 3% crit is more mp5. It's also roughly 1.5% more healing done.

2. 1.5% more healing done is in No Way Imaginable comparable to 3% damage reduction. Firstly, DR is proactive and Healing is reactive. Secondly, it's twice as effective.

3. This is and always has been true. It also really has no bearing on who should spec for kings with multiple paladins - of which you can assure in 25 mans. All theory done is generally for 25 mans.


Point 1 is maths.

Point 2 is picking on an example of a situation that would be comparable to us. Sure 3% mitigation is not the same as 3% crit, but it is a similar style nerf. The 3% crit for a holy paladin helps them in every way to do the thing that they are in the raid for. The only reason a holy paladin should give it up is if they are the only paladin in the raid, or the only paladins in the raid are holy.

The third point you make is that you agree with me in that the only situation in which a prot paladin should safely sacrifice kings is in a raid with a pally who already has it. My real point is that a holy paladin has to sacrifice more than you for a buff which mostly benefits you which you can just as easily pick up.
Image

"mana efficiency is for people who aren't tanking enough mobs" - Knaughty
Mishdorf
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:11 pm

Postby Kaienn » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:27 pm

Mishdorf wrote:
1. Yes, 3% crit is more mp5. It's also roughly 1.5% more healing done.

2. 1.5% more healing done is in No Way Imaginable comparable to 3% damage reduction. Firstly, DR is proactive and Healing is reactive. Secondly, it's twice as effective.

3. This is and always has been true. It also really has no bearing on who should spec for kings with multiple paladins - of which you can assure in 25 mans. All theory done is generally for 25 mans.


Point 1 is maths.


What kind of "Maths"?

I'm very curious to see how a holy paladin will suffer as much as you say they will without 3% crit.
Image
User avatar
Kaienn
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:56 pm

Postby moduspwnens » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:33 pm

I'm picking up kings cause there aren't many other good choices. That said, I still think Divine Guardian is powerful, as well as the PvP talents in Prot, and I expect many Holy Paladins to have Kings, too.
I rule.
moduspwnens
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Shattered Hand

Postby Drathian » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:33 pm

Mishdorf wrote:
Elsie wrote:
Point 5. Threat is not an issue in WotLK. Yes, damage = threat, but a) threat isn't an issue in WotLK at the moment, b) Kings gives both threat and survivability and c) dead tanks do no threat (I know this is technically point b but it's such an important point that it needed mentioning twice).

Threat is not a visible issue yet in naxx. That does not imply it is not an issue as 1) it's beta and 2) fight mechanics could make it so. Even if you have no threat issues, there are complications that can arise in a fight to make it an issue. Never-the-less, it's always a concern, and thus must be accounted for.

EDIT: Kings is always 5 points for everyone. Ret pallys will be getting Imp BoM and Kings, Holy pallies who get it will also likely be getting imp BoW as well. No pally will have untalented blessings.

This is a basic principle of economics. The opportunity cost of Prot for each point of kings is effectively 1 higher since they are forced to give up sanctuary. This is not true of ret/holy since they are not forced into improved blessing of X. Thus, kings is effectively 6 talent points for protection since it forces the point in Sanctuary to be wasted.

I'll assume you agreed with me on points 1-3 and conclusions (of which I editted), so I feel safe in asserting you now agree holy should be the one with kings.


Well I could have picked apart these points a bit more, but chose to focus on the most obviously flawed parts.

So you are now arguing that Holy paladins and Ret paladins will NOT take the improved version of their spells?

Just because we have a mandatory talent in bosanc, does not alleviate the fact that we still need 25 points in the top five tiers. The absolutely 100% required skills by all prot paladins (not counting kings) only take up 19 of those points. That leaves 6 points that we NEED to take in those first five tiers. The only other skill in those tiers which will make a real, definitive difference in 99% of cases to a prot paladin is imp devo aura. So you have three points that are effectively being put into either kings or a flavour talent.

So the opportunity cost of kings is really only two talent points due to the construction of the tree. Three if our 11 point talent turns into a "must have".

On the threat topic - we have been assured by devs that threat should not be an issue in the expansion. Even if it is, not taking kings only gives two more free threat talent points.

1. Yes, 3% crit is more mp5. It's also roughly 1.5% more healing done.

2. 1.5% more healing done is in No Way Imaginable comparable to 3% damage reduction. Firstly, DR is proactive and Healing is reactive. Secondly, it's twice as effective.

3. This is and always has been true. It also really has no bearing on who should spec for kings with multiple paladins - of which you can assure in 25 mans. All theory done is generally for 25 mans.


Point 1 is maths.

Point 2 is picking on an example of a situation that would be comparable to us. Sure 3% mitigation is not the same as 3% crit, but it is a similar style nerf. The 3% crit for a holy paladin helps them in every way to do the thing that they are in the raid for. The only reason a holy paladin should give it up is if they are the only paladin in the raid, or the only paladins in the raid are holy.

The third point you make is that you agree with me in that the only situation in which a prot paladin should safely sacrifice kings is in a raid with a pally who already has it. My real point is that a holy paladin has to sacrifice more than you for a buff which mostly benefits you which you can just as easily pick up.


I don't know why I even bother, or for that matter you even bother.

You will not convince an entire forum that your way is the right way.

You don't want to spec Kings? Don't spec it. That won't stop other Holy Paladins from seeing it as more useful than 3% spell-crit.

What it comes down to is:

You're selfish, you want that 3% spellcrit for a healing and sustainability increase.

We're selfish and defensive because you barge in and tell us we suck for wanting all our tanking goodies: threat, mitigation, and utility.

In the end, we're just going to both make Retribution paladins spec for it.

Gotta love edits:

The awesome thing is that I was fully prepared to be selfless and spec this so that the Retribution paladin could pick up PvP goodies and so the Holy paladin could have his thoroughput.

They in turn were selfless and insisted they both take Kings so that I could optimize my tanking stuff.
Image
Drathian
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:01 am

Postby Mishdorf » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:38 pm

Fridmarr wrote:I still wouldn't call this thread appropriate, but seeing as how it hasn't spiraled into a flame fest yet and it's already on to the second page I'll leave it, but it's being watched.

To the point at hand, the obvious problem with prot pally being the one to get kings is that tanks will be missing a buff. Therefore someone else will have to get kings anyhow to get proper coverage. Ret might be the easiest, and his blessing of might can be given out by a DPS warrior anyhow.

Regardless, I think is more than fair for a build to not have kings. You list a a base prot build that excludes basic things like Guarded by the Light as not being necessary, yet you somehow think kings is. You don't max out Shield of the Templar but yet you drop a point into stoicism. I think, I'd be far more critical of your build than someone's who didn't have kings. Yes I know you left out 9 points, but I think I could make the case that the talents you left out are no less mandatory than Kings.

At the end of the day, whether you like it or not, Kings isn't required, and folks who don't have it aren't stupid. You haven't made any sort of compelling cast to convince me otherwise.


Did you read what I wrote.

Mishdorf wrote:snip for size

http://wotlk.wowhead.com/?talent=sZatVA0uMteIoroxo will be the base protection build. Notice how many more points are spare in the prot build than the holy build. And that is assuming that we get an 11 point talent (which is what the point in stoicism is representing).


I think I could make the case that the talents you left out are no less mandatory than Kings.


The only talent that could be seen as mandatory is Guarded by the Light, which I agree with you I should have put in the spec.

As I have argued though, that still leaves 7 free points for whatever flavour talents are required.

I have said all along, the only situation in which kings can be left out is one in which you can guarantee that someone else will be bringing it. Holy paladins sacrifice more than prot paladins do to pick this up.

Don't forget that bosanc can be provided by priests now if necessary, and that with the extra block rating from imp BoM, even if it's us+holy pally the maths works out nearly the same on damage mitigated with BoK+BoM vs BoK+BoS, at least at early levels of raiding.
Image

"mana efficiency is for people who aren't tanking enough mobs" - Knaughty
Mishdorf
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:11 pm

Postby Drathian » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:39 pm

the extra block rating from imp BoM


Since when?
Image
Drathian
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:01 am

Postby Kaienn » Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:41 pm

Drathian wrote:
the extra block rating from imp BoM


Since when?


Extra STR = Extra Block VALUE... not Rating.
Image
User avatar
Kaienn
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:56 pm

PreviousNext

Return to WotLK

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 { ?