Fun Stuff > CLIKC
World of Warcraft
Covetous:
Mitigation/avoidance > threath > DPS
Have all (dps-)classes/spec become easier to play? My paladin was never very hard to play before 3.0. You could come in tricky situations, but now it's silly easy. I don't have the best gear but I can easily go up vs up to 6 mobs that are higher level then myself and kick there ass. Sure I have quite alot of panic buttons but I hardly need to use them ever. Link [http://eu.wowarmory.com]
PizzaSHARK:
--- Quote from: Alex C on 13 Jan 2009, 00:18 ---Yeah, that still doesn't really change anything about the entire threat-damage dynamic.
--- End quote ---
Except that your damage increases your threat. SoR is inferior to SoC/SoV, so once you get it, you pretty much won't use SoR ever again. It judges for more intially, but after five stacks, JoC/JoV hits pretty much every bit as hard, and potentially a little harder.
People seem to think that you can't get good DPS and good EHP with the same spec - you can, and you should. Seriously, go read Tankspot and Elitist Jerks. The numbers do not lie.
Covetous:
PizzaSHARK, but what is most important for a tank, threath or DPS?
You should do dps, but that is not the main priority for a tank. When looking at a tank you should look at how good they survive and then how much threath they put out. There are several low damage high threath abilitys out there. But all other tank classes (except death knights perhaps) have to sacrifice damage output to add survivability and therefor they have to do more threath compared to damage output. That's the whole idea of a tank.
If a tank do more damage then a dps in the group/raid the dps should be kicked, banned and laughed at under normal cirkumstanses. If it is in any way implied that a tank should do good dps compared to pure dps-specs then theres something wrong with the ballance in the game. Then you should just bring tanks and healers sins you would have the same amout of dps but way better survivability.
This is ofc from a wow point of wiev. Someone might make another mmorpg that revolves around a different mechanics (and they should sins this would be fun). Also, they might have changed their thoughts about tanks and think that a tank is someone who do good DPS while he is being the target of the mob but bad dps otherwise. This is not really the case for any of the tank classes to what I know. The one who get closest is the paladin who do quite a lot of reactive damage. But neither bears or DKs have this. And warriors rather have focus on high threath when they are being the target (more rage).
So, simply put, what I'm trying to say is that any thank should focus more on makeing sure he is doing high amount of threath and not care about the dps until he is sure that none of the dps will reach him in threath. And these two things are both after he made sure his survivability is good enough.
Edit: removed a sentance that wasen't that important.
clockworkjames:
--- Quote from: Covetous on 13 Jan 2009, 04:37 ---You should do dps, but that is not the main priority for a tank. When looking at a tank you should look at how good they survive and then how much threat they put out. There are several low damage high damage abilitys out there. This is mainly the case for warriors. But all other tank classes (except death knights perhaps) have to sacrifice damage output to add survivability and therefor they have to do more threath compared to damage output. That's the whole idea of a tank.
If a tank do more damage then a dps in the group/raid the dps should be kicked, banned and laughed at under normal cirkumstanses. If it is in any way implied that a tank should do good dps compared to pure dps-specs then theres something wrong with the ballance in the game. Then you should just bring tanks and healers sins you would have the same amout of dps but way better survivability.
--- End quote ---
QFT
From where I am coming from that was nail on head else I would not have quoted. Show me a tanking build with Incite and Impale and I will show you where those 5 points could be put to far better use for tanking. As for Def on shield, Alof of the purplz you get have alot less def than the tempered saronite stuff I still use a piece or two of, this allows me to wear purples instead of blues but stay uncrittable at every point. Also DEF is still a gread stat even past the cap for what if does to your defence, not just being uncrittable.
Alex C:
Actually Clockworkjames, no, you can't.
You guys are missing something fairly obvious here. DPS talents are traditionally maligned because of two things:
1. You often have to give up too much survivability to get them.
2. They don't improve the abilities tanks actually use enough to be justifiable. Mortal Strike is a shitty tank talent because frankly, you wouldn't be using it even if you could easily fit it into your build.
With the bigger and better trees available to warriors though, that is no longer necessarily the case. Quite simply, it's easy to get abilities like Incite and Impale without touching survival talents, and they DO improve some of your bread and butter abilities Strike. Instead, you can steal a few points here and there from things like Puncture, which when it comes right down to it, is just another threat talent, and not even a particularly good one. I mean, yes, it increases the Devastate's threat-per-rage, but that doesn't really matter all that much since there's often something better to do with your GCD and because being rage starved is so rarely a major issue these days. All it could really net you is a few more rage per fight, but since you're converting that rage straight into threat anyway, you have to ask yourself if 3 points into Puncture can match 2 points of Impale (and 20% larger Shield Slam crits!) in terms of threat. Personally, considering the devastate nerfs that have gone down, I tend to lean towards Impale, which also gives the added bonus of dealing more damage, which, all things considered, is a good thing. At worst we're talking about sidegrades. YMMV.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version