Gurth: Far more broken in pvp/pve than DWTR

100 Goblin Warlock
17215
Kolzi, the whole "they have a legendary" didn't work during firelands when people kept posting melee were bad etc being only a couple thousand dps behind sometimes. The chest beaters still think that they should be able to beat a legendary. So I suggest once rogues shoot to the top with their legendaries we post a thread every day to get everyone who isn't a rogue buffed since legendaries don't belong being thousands of dps ahead much less you should be able to beat a legendary wielder in dps.

That is what it's become pretty much. Beat in dps by a legendary... goin to the forums and getting buffed next patch.
85 Human Warrior
6440
Kolzi, the whole "they have a legendary" didn't work during firelands when people kept posting melee were bad etc being only a couple thousand dps behind sometimes. The chest beaters still think that they should be able to beat a legendary. So I suggest once rogues shoot to the top with their legendaries we post a thread every day to get everyone who isn't a rogue buffed since legendaries don't belong being thousands of dps ahead much less you should be able to beat a legendary wielder in dps.

That is what it's become pretty much. Beat in dps by a legendary... goin to the forums and getting buffed next patch.


You cry more than a BC mage.
Community Manager
01/02/2012 05:07 PMPosted by Sliphe

Seal hits are melee attacks, Gurthalak procs off melee attacks. It isn't a bug.


It is a bug because Ret has 2x the chance for it to proc off every attack unlike any other melee. No other melee has that interaction with Gurth.


This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.

For other classes, the sword overall does the damage we intend, but it's variable, so a few spectacular numbers are occasionally posted. Those shouldn’t be accepted as typical. Likewise, random burst can sometimes cause high damage in PvP, but we don’t think those situations with Gurthalak are reliable or severe enough to be a balance problem.
100 Human Death Knight
9180
[quote]
[quote]



Ret: 47-42k
Unholy: 43-39k

Shadow priest: 43-40k
Moonkin: 41-37k
Demo lock: 44-40k
Aff lock: 44-36k
Destro lock: 46-41k

Pretty much every one of those parses has a dragonwrath or a gurth. You think it's some coincidence that even the weakest spec using gurth only barely loses to about half of the casters armed with a legendary? It takes a very good double dotting fight for these specs to even begin to compete even with their legendary, and the vast majority of people aren't even using the heroic version of gurthalak.


The reason Unholy is up there isn't so much because of gurth it's because there is a consistent amount of raid damage constantly going out so you can get 99% uptime on the transformed ghoul the whole fight via well-timed AMS soaking.
Edited by Numerodos on 1/4/2012 11:12 AM PST
MVP - Technical Support
100 Human Warrior
20240
01/04/2012 11:11 AMPosted by Kaivax
This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.


Does this also apply to Souldrinker's heal proc that was also showing an unusually higher proc rate for prot paladins then prot warriors, most likely do to Seal of Truth as well?
Edited by Omegal on 1/4/2012 11:51 AM PST
100 Human Paladin
16070
This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.

For other classes, the sword overall does the damage we intend, but it's variable, so a few spectacular numbers are occasionally posted. Those shouldn’t be accepted as typical. Likewise, random burst can sometimes cause high damage in PvP, but we don’t think those situations with Gurthalak are reliable or severe enough to be a balance problem.


So proccing from seal procs is working as intended, but proccing from Censure ticks was a bug?

Sounds reasonable as Censure is just a magic dot.
85 Goblin Hunter
16395

Likewise, random burst can sometimes cause high damage in PvP, but we don’t think those situations with Gurthalak are reliable or severe enough to be a balance problem.


In the first 3v3 arena match that we saw the tentacles against us (was a warrior), a kill was scored on me, and we checked the combat logs after the fight and the tentacles did over 25% of the damage to me in the match. This was 3v3 , so the 2 Players (Warrior and Teammate) did 75% of the damage, and the Tentacles 25%.
Edited by Ztette on 1/4/2012 11:19 AM PST
100 Night Elf Warrior
17635
This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.

For other classes, the sword overall does the damage we intend, but it's variable, so a few spectacular numbers are occasionally posted. Those shouldn’t be accepted as typical. Likewise, random burst can sometimes cause high damage in PvP, but we don’t think those situations with Gurthalak are reliable or severe enough to be a balance problem.


So proccing from seal procs is working as intended, but proccing from Censure ticks was a bug?

Sounds reasonable as Censure is just a magic dot.


I think you misunderstand.

The dot portion wasn't causing the proc. The seal proc on hit was, and that is what they fixed (or are about to fix).

I think its fine, more or less, but they should add spells to what can proc it (but not ranged attacks) because this might swing ret from too many procs to too few when many ret GCDs aren't spend on weapon attacks, while warriors almost always do a weapon attack every GCD, and sometimes more when heroic strike can be used.

That'd be a problem for unholy too if their mastery didn't benefit, so maybe add spells too but prevent unholy mastery from increasing it.
Edited by Asthas on 1/4/2012 11:22 AM PST
85 Blood Elf Paladin
12525

Likewise, random burst can sometimes cause high damage in PvP, but we don’t think those situations with Gurthalak are reliable or severe enough to be a balance problem.


In the first 3v3 arena match that we saw the tentacles against us (was a warrior), a kill was scored on me, and we checked the combat logs after the fight and the tentacles did over 25% of the damage to me in the match. This was 3v3 , so the 2 Players (Warrior and Teammate) did 75% of the damage, and the Tentacles 25%.


Yeah, i had the same thing happen with my rogue partner for 2s. A Arms warrior with Gurth just trained me and had 2 tentacles out slowing me and hitting me for roughly 10k every 1 for 10s. I have 4.5k resillience, so its not because I'm undergeared. That sword is just retarded, and he only had the raidfinder version as well. So from what i gather from the Devs is that casuals can just walk into LFR get an easymode gurth, and then roffle ppl with it in PvP and you call that balance? No wonder cataclsym ended up this bad.
Edited by Myrianda on 1/4/2012 11:28 AM PST
100 Human Paladin
16070



So proccing from seal procs is working as intended, but proccing from Censure ticks was a bug?

Sounds reasonable as Censure is just a magic dot.


I think you misunderstand.

The dot portion wasn't causing the proc. The seal proc on hit was, and that is what they fixed (or are about to fix).

I think its fine, more or less, but they should add spells to what can proc it (but not ranged attacks) because this might swing ret from too many procs to too few when many ret GCDs aren't spend on weapon attacks, while warriors almost always do a weapon attack every GCD, and sometimes more when heroic strike can be used.

That'd be a problem for unholy too if their mastery didn't benefit, so maybe add spells too but prevent unholy mastery from increasing it.


Mmm no, Censure, is the dot that caused from Seal of Truth, the way he worded it, is that Gurth was procing from Censure ticks, but the damage proc from Seal of Truth when you have 5 stacks of Censure on the target (not the dot, the 15% weapon damage that procs) should proc the tentacle.

From what I get, the damage you get from your weapon swings when you have 5 stacks of Censure should proc the tentacle, but the ticking dot from Censure shouldnt.

Seal of Truth
14% of base mana
Instant
Fills the Paladin with holy power, causing single-target attacks to Censure the target, which deals ((0.01 * holy spell power.0270 * AP) * 5 * 110 / 100) additional Holy damage over 15 sec. Censure can stack up to 5 times. Once stacked to 5 times, each of the Paladin's attacks also deals 15% weapon damage as additional Holy damage. Only one Seal can be active on the Paladin at any one time. Lasts 30 min.


Bolded part I think is supposed to proc tentacles, italicised part is not supposed to.
Edited by Paladinchaz on 1/4/2012 11:27 AM PST
85 Troll Hunter
6230
01/04/2012 11:14 AMPosted by Omegal
This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.


Does this also apply to Souldrinker's heal proc that was also showing an unusually higher proc rate for prot paladins then prot warriors, most likely do to censure as well?


If I had to guess it's more likely that it's proccing more often due to Reckoning.
100 Night Elf Warrior
17635



I think you misunderstand.

The dot portion wasn't causing the proc. The seal proc on hit was, and that is what they fixed (or are about to fix).

I think its fine, more or less, but they should add spells to what can proc it (but not ranged attacks) because this might swing ret from too many procs to too few when many ret GCDs aren't spend on weapon attacks, while warriors almost always do a weapon attack every GCD, and sometimes more when heroic strike can be used.

That'd be a problem for unholy too if their mastery didn't benefit, so maybe add spells too but prevent unholy mastery from increasing it.


Mmm no, Censure, is the dot that caused from Seal of Truth, the way he worded it, is that Gurth was procing from Censure ticks, but the damage proc from Seal of Truth when you have 5 stacks of Censure on the target (not the dot, the 15% weapon damage that procs) should proc the tentacle.

From what I get, the damage you get from your weapon swings when you have 5 stacks of Censure should proc the tentacle, but the ticking dot from Censure shouldnt.

Seal of Truth
14% of base mana
Instant
Fills the Paladin with holy power, causing single-target attacks to Censure the target, which deals ((0.01 * holy spell power.0270 * AP) * 5 * 110 / 100) additional Holy damage over 15 sec. Censure can stack up to 5 times. Once stacked to 5 times, each of the Paladin's attacks also deals 15% weapon damage as additional Holy damage. Only one Seal can be active on the Paladin at any one time. Lasts 30 min.


Bolded part I think is supposed to proc tentacles, italicised part is not supposed to.


Its easy to forget that part of the damage shows up as censure and part of it as seal of truth. This doesn't change what was actually happening in game.

Censure was not proccing the weapon. Seal of truth was, and this caused ret to have double the chance to proc it on melee attacks. This is what they are fixing.

No amount of latching on to the accidental use of the word censure will change that. There is a reason it was worded as "double the proc chance," because melee attack + seal was the problem. Censure triggering the weapon wouldn't even add that many procs to be an issue.
Edited by Asthas on 1/4/2012 11:35 AM PST
100 Human Paladin
16070
Its easy to forget that part of the damage shows up as censure and part of it as seal of truth. This doesn't change what was actually happening in game.

Censure was not proccing the weapon. Seal of truth was, and this caused ret to have double the chance to proc it on melee attacks. This is what they are fixing.

No amount of latching on to the accidental use of the word censure will change that. There is a reason it was worded as "double the proc chance," because melee attack + seal was the problem.


No, seal of truth and censure damage are separate damage, and world of logs lists them as separate.

Seal hits are melee attacks, Gurthalak procs off melee attacks. It isn't a bug.


01/04/2012 11:11 AMPosted by Kaivax
This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.


I think you need to reread these two statements.
100 Night Elf Warrior
17635
Its easy to forget that part of the damage shows up as censure and part of it as seal of truth. This doesn't change what was actually happening in game.

Censure was not proccing the weapon. Seal of truth was, and this caused ret to have double the chance to proc it on melee attacks. This is what they are fixing.

No amount of latching on to the accidental use of the word censure will change that. There is a reason it was worded as "double the proc chance," because melee attack + seal was the problem.


No, seal of truth and censure damage are separate damage, and world of logs lists them as separate.

Seal hits are melee attacks, Gurthalak procs off melee attacks. It isn't a bug.


01/04/2012 11:11 AMPosted by Kaivax
This is true, and has been fixed. Gurthalak should not proc off of Censure.


I think you need to reread these two statements.


I have read them. It is a mistake, because censure has not ever procced the weapon. Just to make sure I wasn't crazy, I've even looked through EJ and the people testing it explicitly said that censure ticks do not proc it, but seal of truth procs do.

What I'm getting at is that calling it censure instead of seal of truth is a mistake, because its easy to forget that the seal proc actually does show up as seal of truth and not censure in combat logs.

Why don't you read the thing Kaivax quoted, and consider why it was worded double chance on melee attacks, and not, extra procs from a dot.

I guess I can also ask this. Does it make sense to you for seal of truth to proc it, since you believe it should? Do you think that ret has half as many melee attacks as other specs, so they need two chances to proc on every swing? Doubtful, especially since judgment probably will still be able to proc it. I have no idea what that thing is classified anymore but they did recently fix it so that it'd proc item effects it was intended to proc, whatever that specifically means.

It does have less, so, I'm all for spells being able to proc it too to make it more even, coupled with removing unholy mastery from it.
Edited by Asthas on 1/4/2012 11:54 AM PST
100 Human Paladin
16070
01/04/2012 11:44 AMPosted by Asthas
Why don't you read the thing Kaivax quoted, and consider why it was worded double chance on melee attacks, and not, extra procs from a dot.


Rereading it, I think what it means, is that it wasnt proccing off of the DOT, and proccing off of the SoT damage is working as intended.

I think procing from Censure stacks being applied by SoT was the issue, not the tick, or the SOT bonus damage when 5 stacks are reached, but the stacks that didnt cause damage, just the debuff refreshing from attacks.
Edited by Paladinchaz on 1/4/2012 11:54 AM PST
100 Night Elf Warrior
17635
Why don't you read the thing Kaivax quoted, and consider why it was worded double chance on melee attacks, and not, extra procs from a dot.


Rereading it, I think what it means, is that it wasnt proccing off of the DOT, and proccing off of the SoT damage is working as intended.

I think procing from Censure stacks being applied by SoT was the issue, not the tick, or the SOT bonus damage when 5 stacks are reached, but the stacks that didnt cause damage, just the debuff refreshing from attacks.


That would mean ret would have had a triple proc chance from melee attacks. (melee + SoT + censure refresh) but that wasn't what was observed, either. Double the expected procs occurred, not triple.

It was two chances to proc. There was nothing else causing extra procs beyond melee attacks except seal of truth. That is the only thing there exists that -could- be fixed.
Edited by Asthas on 1/4/2012 11:57 AM PST
100 Human Paladin
16070
01/04/2012 11:56 AMPosted by Asthas


Rereading it, I think what it means, is that it wasnt proccing off of the DOT, and proccing off of the SoT damage is working as intended.

I think procing from Censure stacks being applied by SoT was the issue, not the tick, or the SOT bonus damage when 5 stacks are reached, but the stacks that didnt cause damage, just the debuff refreshing from attacks.


That would mean ret would have had a triple proc chance from melee attacks. (melee + SoT + censure refresh) but that wasn't what was observed, either. Double the expected procs occurred, not triple.

It was two chances to proc. There was nothing else causing extra procs beyond melee attacks except seal of truth. That is the only thing there exists that -could- be fixed.


Well if you use Seal of the Righteous on a single target, and see if those seal damage procs can proc tentacles, theres your answer.
85 Blood Elf Paladin
9410
stop the semantics war this is worse than a ron paul topic

it's been nerfed time to lay this topic to rest
This topic has reached its post limit. You may no longer post or reply to posts for this topic.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]