Remove Advertisements

Exorcism

SPOILERS Discussion about the Cataclysm Beta SPOILERS

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Re: Exorcism

Postby Darielle » Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:23 am

Arincia wrote:Fine ill rephrase it better.
-Judgment is tuned to be the same for ret and prot paladin. They made the mechanic for it give 50% base mana over 10 seconds with a 8 second cool down. The reason they got rid of the judgment cool down reducing talents in the ret tree was to make judgment more consistent and thus mana regen consistent so both specs could be balanced properly without worrying about proper mana management in a normal rotation.


That's not really true. Imp Judgments was changed to 30 yards yes, but changing the cooldown for Prot through talents has no effect on mana regen since we'll be keeping the buff up 100% anyway.

-CS and HoR were adjusted to a shared 4.5 seconds so that there wasn't a CD clash and we would use CS for single target threat over HoR. It used to be 1/2 a second short or 1 second to long to fit in another ability. Blizzard opted to extend both durations to 4.5 seconds and let ret reduce the cool down by scaling with haste. This fixed Holy power generation at a constant rate for prot and allowed ret to get CS more often then prot.


Correct. That's the one thing that both can't be and would probably be a waste to change.

Code: Select all
-SoR has no cool down on it but scales such that players would not want to use it without 3 stacks of holy power. This means it is effectively tied to a 13/13.5/15 second cool down based on HP generation from CS.

But that's the thing. Holy Power need not come from only CS, and any other HP source changes the frequency of ShoR. They're certainly not in a position where they can't change that.

The actual interesting thing is that if they give us more HP gen, they'll have to make sure it doesn't devolve into keeping both Inq and ShoR in a cycle. That's not likely to happen, and Inq's baseline power and cooldown can be tweaked and Ret's modifier(Inquiry of Faith) boosted if they find that a concern should they choose to use this route.

-Avengers shield is a 15 second cool down. It used to be a lot higher but when they lowered the cool down from 24 seconds to 15 (37.5% cool down reduction) they also reduced its damage by the same amount (7k to 4.3k so 37.5%). There is also a blue post stating that if they make the proc any better/cool down lower on it they consequently have to also reduce the damage. This means any shorter cool down also reduces its significance as threat ability from the damage component.

So? No matter what they do, if the problem is that there's too many gaps, it's not like they're just going to shove another spell we can use in there and give us free additional damage. Either way, providing it does enough damage to be effective snap threat, it does the job of giving snap threat when needed. If it hits for 10k or 8k shouldn't affect its snappitude unless it needs to be nerfed to the point of not provide enough snap. At the end of the day though, they shouldn't (and probably won't) reduce its cooldown specifically to fill gaps, but they're not immune to making that kind of change if that's what Prot needs.

SO in review they have set us up with a mixed bag of messages. They want SoR to be the HP "dump" for us but its effectively only a 12-15 sec cool down due to CS/HoR HP generation. AS is only a effective 15 second shifting cool down. Judgment could only be used once in a 15 second rotation or 3 times a 30 second rotation. With just those abilities we look at only 13/20 GCD per 20 seconds. If we use Conc and HW its still only 16/20 seconds. But that means we are literally having 5/16 or 31% of our ability in a single target rotation be aoe. Compared to live with HoR and Conc were 1.5/6 (42%) of our abilities are aoe its not much of a change. Heck without HW and Conc we are looking at a 7/20 dead time or 35% dead time. 1/3 the time your doing nothing. That's just stupid and we may as well have scripts playing for us with that much passive play.20 or 25% sure that's probably fine as a cap but 35% is just to much. And when we do fill it not we're back to using more aoe again. And Blizzard fine with this after stating they want everyone to use less aoe? 31% as aoe just to fill gaps? If HW has no CD with the glyph to be spammed it's even worse and counters the stated intent.


I think you're trying to moving ahead of the development team a bit. They've been focused so far on making sure that the spells function they way they want them to - and making Holy Power function. Build after build has come with massive changes and revamps, particularly to ShoR/Holy Shield. Now we're finally settled and in a place where things are going to be tweaked and ironed out. The feedback that so many empty GCD's is too much is fine, it gives them a direction to work with. Beyond that though, the metric of "too much" is probably going to be a debate, particularly between Paladins and Blizzard for a while to come.

That said, I think you're mixing the messages a bit. They're not simply just trying to make it so that no aoe buttons are used ever on single targets. However, they don't want people simply using the same buttons on trash and aoe. If 9-6-9-6 works on single targets and you 9-6-9-6 through trash too, or you use Consecrate and DS on single targets too so you basically do the same thing on single target and bosses, and you have to be balanced around doing enough single target damage but get free cleave damage, that's what they want to avoid. As such, for Prot, it seems like they're satisfied with the variation that HotR and Inquisition provide overall for that purpose. What they're going for Consecrate and HW is mana as a limiter, and possibly cooldown. But as such, they're not going for an extreme "If you use AoE on single target at all, it's bad". They want people to simply switch things up for the two situations. That's all.

If Prot and Ret (I'm using both because the design applies to both specs) are using Consecrate and HW "too often" in single target because they have infinite mana and enough time that they might as well use them, JotW will probably get a slight kick until it throttles enough to do the job of making a Paladin think. If the reason they're using it is because there's too many empty gcd's and that's made clear, the empty gcd's can get looked at instead, and JotW will probably get throttled a bit anyway just to ram that in. Or, JotW will get hammered, the spec in question will have too many empty gcd's, and they'll be giving feedback about that anyway.

Side note: That discussion was back when Consecrate had no cooldown. Consecrate will probably be worth using on single target anyway because of the fact that over 10 seconds it's almost assured outdamage our weakest single target ability. So the cooldown is the limiter now, and it's Holy Wrath that may be under question if that ends up being an issue.

That's it. Again, How are they going to adjust the numbers? With AS we live on a 15 second heartbeat. IF it gets lowered we live on SoR 12-15 second heartbeat. To lower that we have to lower CS/HoR. So they in essence would have to adjust at least 2 of our 3 main ability cool downs.


As said above, to lower that we need more Holy Power. It doesn't have to be from CS, and it doesn't have to come from a rng source. There's lots of freedom and lots of room for them to do something if it's needed. Right now, if we as Prot Paladins want a change, the first thing is to make an argument for why it's needed.

However, an argument revolving around filling EVERY gcd and resulting in a repeatable cycle probably won't work, because that's not what they're going for. They want the variation to happen. They haven't got there yet, but that's also more feedback that's useful to them.

Do you think would blizzard even try to tune something like this? Blizzard has a huge history of band-aid fixing and nerfs/over buffing instead of dealing with the real issue. It's also easier at this point to have them consider a conceptual pass of exorcism as a partial gap filler then a number pass and leave us screwed. They won't listen to numbers until there done with the conceptual phase and by then its to late and they have made up their minds for numbers.


As of now, this entire discussion as an issue is a conceptual one. So yes, right now it's the kind of feedback that Blizzard would be looking for and tuning for not just us, for many classes.

But it is right now a conceptual issue entirely.

The good thing is, that's the kind of feedback they are getting.

Anyway, the main thrust of my point is that making Exorcism instant isn't the only way to "fix" the "problem". If anything, my preference would be for a Holy Power solution.
Darielle
 
Posts: 1317
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Exorcism

Postby Arincia » Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:40 am

A holy power solution is bad though for balancing our threat. Yes we want more but consider the impacts as well. Blizzard then has to balance us against additional HP generated and consequently more threat that we may or may not get. If we get lucky we soar ahead and if we aren't we're behind. By keeping it a steady HP generation it is much easier for them to tune us for threat then with more holy power generation. I'm not saying it wouldn't be fun or convenient but its better for balance and tuning purposes.

Anything that would impact CSx3>SoR is going to have a huge implication on our threat output. It makes more sense to drop down to the number 2 or 3 ability to make that a more dynamic feature as it has less of a overall impact.
This leaves us a short list of AS, Judgment as main abilities left to choose from and AS is what they choose.
Image
Arincia
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:13 am

Re: Exorcism

Postby Darielle » Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:09 am

Arincia wrote:A holy power solution is bad though for balancing our threat. Yes we want more but consider the impacts as well. Blizzard then has to balance us against additional HP generated and consequently more threat that we may or may not get. If we get lucky we soar ahead and if we aren't we're behind. By keeping it a steady HP generation it is much easier for them to tune us for threat then with more holy power generation. I'm not saying it wouldn't be fun or convenient but its better for balance and tuning purposes.

Anything that would impact CSx3>SoR is going to have a huge implication on our threat output. It makes more sense to drop down to the number 2 or 3 ability to make that a more dynamic feature as it has less of a overall impact.
This leaves us a short list of AS, Judgment as main abilities left to choose from and AS is what they choose.


That doesn't logically compute. Classes with procs stay balanced and can function when procs don't happen. The proccy nature simply gives a bit of burst in a given time that a competent player can take advantage of, and averages out over time. There is a middle ground in the extreme of "If a proc happens, you do eleventy billion damage" and "If a proc doesn't happen, you do next to none", and it's tweaked by things like what causes the proc.

If you've ever played a Feral Druid, Roar/Rip/Bite follow that philosophy. Ret's also going to have elements of that with their interaction with TV. The good thing is we're different from both of those.
Darielle
 
Posts: 1317
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Exorcism

Postby theckhd » Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:22 am

Arianne wrote:
theckhd wrote:That doesn't make sense. 969 is a priority list. The beta implementation is a priority list. Pretty much any rotation can be boiled down to a priority queue. If we don't end up with a priority list, that means we're either casting only one spell or none at all.


A priority list is something like X > Y > Z. It's an easy decision tree. If button 1 is lit up, you hit it. If it's not, then hit button 2. If that's not then spam button Z.


You mean sort of like this? The lack of an "else spam Z" entry doesn't somehow make it not a decision tree, it just makes it a decision tree whose last line is "else empty GCD."

Arianne wrote:If 969 were a priority list, then we'd hit ShoR > HotR > Cons > Judge. We don't, therefore 969 is not a priority list.


Except we do. From the previous link:

Theck wrote:So, now that we've considered all the possibilities available if we limit ourselves to the 5 fundamental abilities, we can draw some conclusions:

  • 969 is an FCFS constructed with only the 5 fundamental abilities with a priority queue of the form:
    • (6s) > (9s) > (6s) > (9s) > (9s), or
    • (9s) > (6s) > (9s) > (6s) > (9s).
    • The 6's and 9's can be placed in any order without changing the result, as long as the two 6's are never in adjacent spots.


In fact, the best argument you could come up with for 969 not being a queue is that it in fact decouples into two separate queues, one for 9's and one for 6's. Which is still a priority queue implementation, just with two orthogonal queues.

Arianne wrote:If I want to hit a Hand, then I put it in a specific slot in my rotation (unless it's super important ASAP), I don't just hit it - that makes me plan in advance where I'm going to put stuff.

This isn't in any way incompatible with a priority queue. Substitutions can always be modeled as being temporarily inserted into the queue.

Arianne wrote:What I object to about a priority list is that it's boring. There's nothing to think about in advance. I know people argue that 969 is like that, but I think it's a step above a priority list.

There's nothing to think about in advance with 969 either. If anything, it's more static than a queue system containing procs (like the Warrior model). I think it's certainly more elegant, but it still boils down to being a priority queue that just happens to have convenient cooldowns that don't clash.
"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: 7801
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Exorcism

Postby theckhd » Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:30 am

Marblehead wrote:Grand Crusader
When your Crusader Strike or Hammer of the Righteous deal damage, they have a 20/40% chance of refreshing the cooldown on Avenger's Shield. Also, when your Judgement deals damage, it has a 50/100% chance to generate Holy Power.


There. I fixed tankadins :shock:

Nah, you'd want the HP generation on AS, as someone else mentioned. The real problem with Grand Crusader is that even if AS hits hard, it will be lower on the queue than CS because of the HP mechanic. Whether it's above or below Judgement will depend on how hard it hits compared to AS - if Judgement is strong enough, pushing it back by up to 2 GCDs won't make sense.

If they want AS to be high-priority, it should grant one point of Holy Power. That suddenly bumps it up near the top of the queue, and makes it an exciting button to press. They would probably have to nerf the damage of ShoR to compensate for the increased HP generation rate. Honestly though, AS generating HP is probably the best suggestion yet for how to fix Grand Crusader.
"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: 7801
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Exorcism

Postby theckhd » Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:02 am

Arincia wrote:A holy power solution is bad though for balancing our threat. Yes we want more but consider the impacts as well. Blizzard then has to balance us against additional HP generated and consequently more threat that we may or may not get. If we get lucky we soar ahead and if we aren't we're behind. By keeping it a steady HP generation it is much easier for them to tune us for threat then with more holy power generation. I'm not saying it wouldn't be fun or convenient but its better for balance and tuning purposes.

Anything that would impact CSx3>SoR is going to have a huge implication on our threat output. It makes more sense to drop down to the number 2 or 3 ability to make that a more dynamic feature as it has less of a overall impact.
This leaves us a short list of AS, Judgment as main abilities left to choose from and AS is what they choose.


I think you're completely blowing this out of proportion. Grand Crusader reduces the cooldown of AS by a few seconds, on average (3 or so, I believe). Once you factor in reaction time and pushback due to CS/ShoR, this is not a "huge" increase in HP generation compared to having a fixed 15-second cooldown.

See the warrior model for evidence that it's completely possible to balance threat output around proc-related abilities.
"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: 7801
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Exorcism

Postby Gideon » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:13 am

How much extra HP would I need to be generating through procs etc before I "had to" keep up Inquisition while shield slamming bosses? That's the point in my mind where the AOE and ST rotations, such as they are, become identical.
Gideon
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:12 pm

Re: Exorcism

Postby theckhd » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:54 am

Gideon wrote:How much extra HP would I need to be generating through procs etc before I "had to" keep up Inquisition while shield slamming bosses? That's the point in my mind where the AOE and ST rotations, such as they are, become identical.

That would depend on a number of things (Inq's final duration, ShoR's final damage and type, AS+Judg+HW's damages). If ShoR is changed to physical damage, for example, it's basically a non-issue.

That said, I don't think it'll be a serious concern. Right now, the design constraint has to be:

30% of (All AS+Jud+HW+Cons+Seal damage done in 12 seconds) < 3HP ShoR

Otherwise, we'd never use ShoR.

If you allow for overlap, the comparison changes slightly due to the interaction. Now you're comparing 2x ShoR to the 30% buff over 12 seconds and one buffed ShoR:

30% of (AS+Jud+HW+Cons+Seal over 12) < 70% 3HP ShoR


At the extreme upper end, you could Imagine generating 2 HP every 3 GCDS if every CS procced AS:
(CS-X-AS-CS-I-AS-CS-AS-ShoR---CS-X-AS-CS-I-AS-CS-AS-ShoR----CS-X-AS-CS-I-AS-CS-AS-ShoR)

X slots are likely filled with Jud in this situation, underlining indicates Inquisition active. Note that AS damage will be much higher in this scenario because we're assuming it procs a lot more, so even though we're casting fewer other spells, the net contribution of 30% (AS+Jud+HW+Cons+Seal) will go up considerably because you're replacing HW or Cons with AS.

Even in this case, you only ever get one ShoR per Inq, but now you can keep up Inq up for almost every GCD that you aren't recasting Inq. That bumps the relationship up to

30% of (3xAS+Jud+Seal over 12) < 70% 3HP ShoR

Again, that's an extreme case. The more reasonable comparison is probably just one of each spell, i.e. (1xAS+1xJud+1xHW Seal over 12) < 70% 3HP ShoR

The non-extreme case might look something like this (AS procs every 2-3 CS):
CS-AS-J-CS-I-X-CS-AS-X-CS-ShoR-J-CS-AS-X-CS-I-J-CS-X-X-CS-AS-ShoR-CS-J-X-CS-X-X-CS-I-J-
"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: 7801
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Exorcism

Postby Marblehead » Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:16 am

theckhd wrote:
Marblehead wrote:Grand Crusader
When your Crusader Strike or Hammer of the Righteous deal damage, they have a 20/40% chance of refreshing the cooldown on Avenger's Shield. Also, when your Judgement deals damage, it has a 50/100% chance to generate Holy Power.


There. I fixed tankadins :shock:

Nah, you'd want the HP generation on AS, as someone else mentioned. The real problem with Grand Crusader is that even if AS hits hard, it will be lower on the queue than CS because of the HP mechanic. Whether it's above or below Judgement will depend on how hard it hits compared to AS - if Judgement is strong enough, pushing it back by up to 2 GCDs won't make sense.

If they want AS to be high-priority, it should grant one point of Holy Power. That suddenly bumps it up near the top of the queue, and makes it an exciting button to press. They would probably have to nerf the damage of ShoR to compensate for the increased HP generation rate. Honestly though, AS generating HP is probably the best suggestion yet for how to fix Grand Crusader.

Basically, it's the almost the same thing. Judgement is cast every 2 CS. Since I buffed the proc chance to 40%, if AS was to generate HP it would be every 2-3 CS.

However, I don't know if I would want a proc to affect my resources. Paying attention to an unstable HP generation could become a bit tedious during busy boss fights.

Also, having Judgement generate HP doesn't necessarily make it a higher priority ability than AS. The rotation would be like this:

CS J x CS SotR x CS J x CS Inq/WoG x


If you want AS to be a higher priority, just shift the 2nd-beat abilities to the 3rd beat, like

CS x J CS x SotR CS x J CS x Inq/WoG

The rotation isn't affected and you can use AS immediately after it procs.


Anyway, in any case, I think we agree that an increase of AS's proc chance would be a good first step towards fixing things.

Numbers are easy to balance. Mechanics are more important.
Image
Life is not difficult, people are.
User avatar
Marblehead
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: Bloodhoof (EU)

Re: Exorcism

Postby Arianne » Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:46 am

Theck wrote:In fact, the best argument you could come up with for 969 not being a queue is that it in fact decouples into two separate queues, one for 9's and one for 6's. Which is still a priority queue implementation, just with two orthogonal queues.


Exactly. It's not one simplistic queue and the order that you use your abilities differs by what you want to do. It'd be much better if they gave us a proc for each queue than dumb our rotation down into one priority queue.

Theck wrote:This isn't in any way incompatible with a priority queue. Substitutions can always be modeled as being temporarily inserted into the queue.


Except in a straight priority queue it doesn't matter where you put them in because at most it delays you by one GCD. In my rotation I often wait for a couple of abilities for the one to replace (ie: HS or judgement).

Theck wrote:There's nothing to think about in advance with 969 either. If anything, it's more static than a queue system containing procs (like the Warrior model). I think it's certainly more elegant, but it still boils down to being a priority queue that just happens to have convenient cooldowns that don't clash.


Except Sword and Board arguably does nothing to impact the warrior's queue because it's on an ability that has such a short cooldown anyway. If you get it one second earlier than it would have been normally, who cares? Flex has said that he doesn't even pay attention to it and multiple other people have said that they just spam whatever button lights up no matter what happens. That's not interesting.

Our 969 rotation is constrained by the need to keep up HS and Judgement (for JotJ). Warriors don't even have that much. In Cata, we're losing the need to keep HS up because it's done automatically for us. I'm of mixed minds of that because on one hand I think it's more convenient to not have to hit the button every 9s when it doesn't do damage anymore, but on the other hand it turns us even more into warriors.

Having a proc for each queue gives us more complexity and makes it so that you can't macro your rotation anymore and also gives a downside for messing up or not paying attention to your procs, but they'd have to be something relatively moderate. So that a paladin who paid attention to both of the procs could do a couple of thousand threat more but a paladin that didn't or who only paid attention to one of the procs wasn't too terribly gimped.
Arianne
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:22 pm

Re: Exorcism

Postby Arcand » Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:20 am

Arianne wrote:Except Sword and Board arguably does nothing to impact the warrior's queue because it's on an ability that has such a short cooldown anyway. If you get it one second earlier than it would have been normally, who cares? Flex has said that he doesn't even pay attention to it and multiple other people have said that they just spam whatever button lights up no matter what happens. That's not interesting.


That isn't an ability-sequencing problem, though, that's a problem of tanking being tuned to 'pretty easy'. If threat numbers were tuned more tightly, then using S&B procs with appropriate priority would be one of the things that distinguished okay warriors from great warriors.
Arcand
Moderator
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:15 am

Re: Exorcism

Postby theckhd » Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:57 pm

Marblehead wrote:
theckhd wrote:
Marblehead wrote:Grand Crusader
When your Crusader Strike or Hammer of the Righteous deal damage, they have a 20/40% chance of refreshing the cooldown on Avenger's Shield. Also, when your Judgement deals damage, it has a 50/100% chance to generate Holy Power.


There. I fixed tankadins :shock:

Nah, you'd want the HP generation on AS, as someone else mentioned. The real problem with Grand Crusader is that even if AS hits hard, it will be lower on the queue than CS because of the HP mechanic. Whether it's above or below Judgement will depend on how hard it hits compared to AS - if Judgement is strong enough, pushing it back by up to 2 GCDs won't make sense.

If they want AS to be high-priority, it should grant one point of Holy Power. That suddenly bumps it up near the top of the queue, and makes it an exciting button to press. They would probably have to nerf the damage of ShoR to compensate for the increased HP generation rate. Honestly though, AS generating HP is probably the best suggestion yet for how to fix Grand Crusader.

Basically, it's the almost the same thing. Judgement is cast every 2 CS. Since I buffed the proc chance to 40%, if AS was to generate HP it would be every 2-3 CS.

However, I don't know if I would want a proc to affect my resources. Paying attention to an unstable HP generation could become a bit tedious during busy boss fights.

Also, having Judgement generate HP doesn't necessarily make it a higher priority ability than AS. The rotation would be like this:

CS J x CS SotR x CS J x CS Inq/WoG x


If you want AS to be a higher priority, just shift the 2nd-beat abilities to the 3rd beat, like

CS x J CS x SotR CS x J CS x Inq/WoG

The rotation isn't affected and you can use AS immediately after it procs.


Anyway, in any case, I think we agree that an increase of AS's proc chance would be a good first step towards fixing things.

Numbers are easy to balance. Mechanics are more important.


I didn't say that Judgement generating HP would push it higher in the queue than AS, though maybe I didn't specify that clearly enough. I was noting that in the current iteration of GrCrus, you can run into situations like this:

CS(1)-J-X-CS(2)-X-X-CS(3,proc)-Y-ShoR-CS(1)

So for slot Y, you have the option of Judgement or AS. If you cast AS, you gain (AS-Jud), but you push back Judgement by 3 GCDs, a DPS loss of 33% on Judgement. Whether or not that's a worthwhile tradeoff will obviously depend on how hard each hits, and whether pushing Judgement off causes cooldown clashes further down the line that delay other abilities.

If you put HP generation on AS, now it's suddenly worth reversing that to be CS(3,proc)-ShoR-AS-. Though as you noted, that might get uneven and hard to keep track of on hectic boss fights.

If you put it on Judgement, as in your first example, you never get put in that position. The HP from Judgement to push ShoR and/or Inq down to an effective 9-second cooldown. That does a really nice job of condensing the rotation and eliminating the ugly, empty GCDs. So in that sense I like it. The downside is that it's basically just a flat increase to our HP generation rate (not interactive), and as a result ShoR damage would have to be nerfed a bit to compensate, making it weaker with respect to Inquisition, which might lead to us ignoring ShoR entirely or having to alternate ShoR and Inq (which is not the design intent, I'm guessing).
"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: 7801
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Exorcism

Postby theckhd » Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:28 pm

Arianne wrote:
Theck wrote:In fact, the best argument you could come up with for 969 not being a queue is that it in fact decouples into two separate queues, one for 9's and one for 6's. Which is still a priority queue implementation, just with two orthogonal queues.


Exactly. It's not one simplistic queue and the order that you use your abilities differs by what you want to do. It'd be much better if they gave us a proc for each queue than dumb our rotation down into one priority queue.

No. It is still one simplistic queue. It just happens to be separable, so that you can fill it multiple different ways and get the same steady-state rotation.

Talking about slipping procs into only one of the separated queues is sort of irrelevant. Your primary reason for doing that would be to increase DPS by putting a higher-damage proc over a lower-damage spell. But 969 isn't a maximum-DPS queue to begin with, so in general you'd be better off with (surprise surprise) a single "simplistic" queue that's just ranked on total damage.

Arianne wrote:
Theck wrote:This isn't in any way incompatible with a priority queue. Substitutions can always be modeled as being temporarily inserted into the queue.


Except in a straight priority queue it doesn't matter where you put them in because at most it delays you by one GCD. In my rotation I often wait for a couple of abilities for the one to replace (ie: HS or judgement).

What? It very much does matter where you put it. Using your example:
HotR>Cons>ShoR>(sub)>Jud>HS
would be a 969 where you substitute some spell (AS for example) for Judgement or HS.

The only case where you just push everything else back is when the proc is so good that it's at the very top of the queue. And even then, I'd argue that the proc's position in the queue does matter, because if you put it anywhere else it doesn't have the same effect.

Arianne wrote:
Theck wrote:There's nothing to think about in advance with 969 either. If anything, it's more static than a queue system containing procs (like the Warrior model). I think it's certainly more elegant, but it still boils down to being a priority queue that just happens to have convenient cooldowns that don't clash.


Except Sword and Board arguably does nothing to impact the warrior's queue because it's on an ability that has such a short cooldown anyway. If you get it one second earlier than it would have been normally, who cares? Flex has said that he doesn't even pay attention to it and multiple other people have said that they just spam whatever button lights up no matter what happens. That's not interesting.

There are several serious misconceptions in this paragraph:
  1. S&B never did anything to change the warrior's queue in the first place, all it does is make a high-priority skill available earlier. It's exactly the same as Grand Crusader in that respect
  2. Shield Slam being on a short cooldown doesn't make the proc irrelevant. It still reduces the average cooldown of the ability, increasing the number of Devastates you replace with Shield Slam over the course of a fight. It also makes SS free to cast, giving you more rage to convert into damage via Heroic Strike. So even if it procs with one second left on SS's cooldown, it's still a beneficial proc.
  3. It's not my fault Flex plays his warrior poorly. I'm only partly kidding here - ignoring S&B procs and only casting Shield Slam every 6 seconds will be a reasonable threat loss over the course of a fight.



Arianne wrote:Our 969 rotation is constrained by the need to keep up HS and Judgement (for JotJ). Warriors don't even have that much.

Yes, they obviously don't have to apply an attack speed slow, or apply a boss attack power debuff, nor do they have to watch timers on those debuffs that we get for free as part of our rotation. Oh how boring it must be to be a warrior, not being constrained by anything. :roll:
"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: 7801
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Exorcism

Postby Flex » Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:33 pm

Flex has said that he doesn't even pay attention to it


I said I never notice it right away.

theckhd wrote:[*]It's not my fault Flex plays his warrior poorly. I'm only partly kidding here - ignoring S&B procs and only casting Shield Slam every 6 seconds will be a reasonable threat loss over the course of a fight.[/list]


So do you play your warrior in such a way that every time you press Devastate you wait a beat to see if SnB procced or are you already pressing the next ability to minimize dead space? For me I usually lose one GCD every time SnB procs.
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: Exorcism

Postby Yelena » Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:44 pm

Flex wrote:So do you play your warrior in such a way that every time you press Devastate you wait a beat to see if SnB procced or are you already pressing the next ability to minimize dead space? For me I usually lose one GCD every time SnB procs.

That depends on how your UI is set up likely. Mine is set up such that, unless I'm devoting a lot of bandwidth to other things, I can usually catch (and adjust to) Sword & Board procs before the GCD it procced on has finished recycling.
Valleri - Frostwolf
Yelena
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:54 am
Location: Behind the Eight Ball

PreviousNext

Return to Cataclysm

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 { ?