patch 5.2 ?

[Klaudandus]

It's not exactly a huge nerf. And remember, it's a buff at low Vengeance, which is the common situation you'll be at on pulls or picking up adds. It was probably done to try and help improve those situations without buffing our steady-state DPS.

Quiet you! I want to have my cake and eat it too!

[Klaudandus]

I cannot confirm this, but... 5.2 has the return of the helm enchants... as part of the legendary quest!?

[Sagara]

Well, Greg stated on his Twitter that this *isn't* an head enchant. Which does seem a bit contrary to what's on the patch notes.
Maybe another special slot to put on helms? THat's be quite a bit of extra slots, all in all.

[Fenris]

It's not exactly a huge nerf. And remember, it's a buff at low Vengeance, which is the common situation you'll be at on pulls or picking up adds. It was probably done to try and help improve those situations without buffing our steady-state DPS.

The main problem i have with it is that i don't see it as a meaningfull buff when they place it on an over-time spell,while the problem is the next-to-0 snap aggro compared to other tanks

Well, Greg stated on his Twitter that this *isn't* an head enchant. Which does seem a bit contrary to what's on the patch notes.

TF2-style

[halabar]

Looking forward to the potential new pets that have been datamined, and wondering if they are going to add any other old-world beasts to the new "Dire Horn" family.

Getting a sneaking suspicion that the one island we'll discover will be a cross between King Kong's island and Jurassic Park, but with a giant TRex as the end-boss.

[theckhd]

It's not exactly a huge nerf. And remember, it's a buff at low Vengeance, which is the common situation you'll be at on pulls or picking up adds. It was probably done to try and help improve those situations without buffing our steady-state DPS.

The main problem i have with it is that i don't see it as a meaningfull buff when they place it on an over-time spell,while the problem is the next-to-0 snap aggro compared to other tanks

Oh, I never said it was going to be a very effective buff. It might be a buff to solo content though, where you never get very much Vengeance and can reasonably assume the full duration of Cons.

I still think that removing the meteor mechanic from Holy Wrath is what we need to make snap aggro tolerable. Who knows, though - maybe this was an intentional nerf to Cons to make up for the extra AoE DPS that sort of Holy Wrath buff would give us?

[Klaudandus]

It's not exactly a huge nerf. And remember, it's a buff at low Vengeance, which is the common situation you'll be at on pulls or picking up adds. It was probably done to try and help improve those situations without buffing our steady-state DPS.

The main problem i have with it is that i don't see it as a meaningfull buff when they place it on an over-time spell,while the problem is the next-to-0 snap aggro compared to other tanks

Oh, I never said it was going to be a very effective buff. It might be a buff to solo content though, where you never get very much Vengeance and can reasonably assume the full duration of Cons.

I still think that removing the meteor mechanic from Holy Wrath is what we need to make snap aggro tolerable. Who knows, though - maybe this was an intentional nerf to Cons to make up for the extra AoE DPS that sort of Holy Wrath buff would give us?

can't they switch to cons ticking right at cast... basically, becoming 0-8 ?

[Newsom]

PTR just went up, so far it is extremely buggy. People are missing spells and you can't interact with objects.

[Klaudandus]

GC seems to be ignoring all paladin tank tweets... makes me wonder if its because he fears how thorough Theck's theorycraft is.

[Fenris]

GC seems to be ignoring all paladin tank tweets... makes me wonder if its because he fears how thorough Theck's theorycraft is.

I guess he's skipping all paladin-related stuff since he managed to piss off all the rets a few days ago.

Once again

[Fetzie]

GC seems to be ignoring all paladin tank tweets... makes me wonder if its because he fears how thorough Theck's theorycraft is.

I've sent him about half a dozen, no answer. Of course, I might be doing it wrong and they aren't being sent, that is always a possibility (a real one too, I don't really "get" this social media stuff).

[Klaudandus]

I guess he's skipping all paladin-related stuff since he managed to piss off all the rets a few days ago.

Once again

I've sent him about half a dozen, no answer. Of course, I might be doing it wrong and they aren't being sent, that is always a possibility (a real one too, I don't really "get" this social media stuff).

Send him several tweets myself... asking basically if its intended or not that the consecration change is a nerf at high levels of vengeance, and remains mum on it.

Even if he wants to stay mum regarding ret pallys, its not an excuse to not address prot pallies... consecration is a prot pally only spell.

I just think he is aware of the sway Theck and his math crunching has over the community as a whole. If Theck says something sucks then the whole community says it sucks, no matter how bad GC says it doesn't.

[theckhd]

Which is a bad example of groupthink, to be honest. I do make mistakes occasionally, after all.

But in any event, I doubt he's trying to avoid anyone. He must get a ridiculous number of tweets every day, and only responds to a tiny percentage of them. And probably primarily to ones that he can jot off answers to quickly without looking up too much data. I wouldn't be surprised if he handed this to a class dev with instructions to "buff Cons at lower AP levels, but don't buff it much/at all at high AP levels." It's not like he tweaks every number himself.

Plus it's not a large enough nerf to make Consecration suck. It's such a minor effect that it's probably not worth his time commenting on it.

[Klaudandus]

Which is a bad example of groupthink, to be honest. I do make mistakes occasionally, after all.

But in any event, I doubt he's trying to avoid anyone. He must get a ridiculous number of tweets every day, and only responds to a tiny percentage of them. And probably primarily to ones that he can jot off answers to quickly without looking up too much data. I wouldn't be surprised if he handed this to a class dev with instructions to "buff Cons at lower AP levels, but don't buff it much/at all at high AP levels." It's not like he tweaks every number himself.

Plus it's not a large enough nerf to make Consecration suck. It's such a minor effect that it's probably not worth his time commenting on it.

Quiet you, you are math perfection incarnated!!!

I just dont think the cons buff is enough... not compared to the other tanks... at least getting the conversation started we might be able to sneak ideas about holy wrath being a proper snap aggro tool

Also, if you have the sway is because you show the math openly for everyone to see... whereas Blizz tends to be very secretive and asks us to thrust them blindly... even if your math proves otherwise

[Sagara]

OTOH, it's PTR release day, and like Theck stated, he already gets a crapton of tweets a day.

I'm betting he's waiting until we are INSIDE the PTR before answering any questions about Cons. Data gathering and all that.