World of Warcraft™

....and why it doesn't work.

Warlock Ember System
How does Destruction’s Ember system work?
Basically, you build embers with some spells, and then spend those embers with Soul Fire, Ember Tap, or Fire and Brimstone.

Internally, this is how it works:

Immolate – DD + DoT on the target
Incinerate – generates 1/10th ember, or 2/10ths if it crits an immolated target.
Fel Flame – generates 1/10th ember, or 2/10ths if it crits an immolated target.
Conflagrate – triggers Backdraft and has a 12 second cooldown.

Soul Fire – consumes one ember instead of mana.
Fire and Brimstone – costs 1 ember and has no cooldown.
Ember Tap – costs 1 embers.

Each full ember costs 0.33% of your maximum health per second. If you stay below 1 ember, you take no damage.

How does chaotic energy work?
We are experimenting with a resource-driven, rather than time-limited, caster model on the Destruction warlock.

In a nutshell, Destruction warlocks are not GCD locked. In fact, chain-casting spells as a Destruction warlock is less important than spending all of your resources.

Keep in mind this is all subject to change, but here is how Destruction flows at the moment:

Start of Fight: Full mana bar, Empty Ember bar

1. Immolate the target
2. Conflagrate to trigger emberstorm
3. Incinerate to generate embers
4. Continue until you are low on mana

Middle of Fight: Empty mana bar, ~2 Embers

1. Soul Fire
2. Soul Fire
3. Mana bar is mostly full (Soul Fire costs embers, so your mana refills during the Soul Fires)

In addition to increasing your base mana regen, Chaotic Energy increases mana regen even more with Haste. This means the ability to cast spells scales smoothly with gear.

As long as the warlock never lets her mana bar fill up and burn her embers, she's maximizing damage. This is very different from the standard caster model where priority is placed on casting at all times and ordering spells based on cooldown.

Our hope is that the Destruction Warlock will attract players who are interested in a playstyle that rewards spending resources at the right time, rather than constantly casting.

How does Destruction’s Mastery work?
Emberstorm increases the effectiveness of all Ember consuming spells. Soul Fire deals more damage. Fire & Brimstone deals a higher % of the base spell’s damage. Ember Tap heals for more. (Blue Tracker / Official Forums)

So this system seems to be similar to the changes that happened to Arcane in Cataclysm, in the sense that the goal of Arcane seems to be to provide a "unique caster playstyle" instead of necessarily making a spec that works. In the quote above, we have another attempt at a "unique caster playstyle".

The problem with this is, unless you're super-casual joe, you don't play a spec because you like the "unique playstyle". You play a spec because it gives the most DPS. If that spec is Destro, you go Destro whether you like the playstyle or not, and you make it work. Its pretty much accepted that there's going to be a "best spec" out there each patch - even if the DPS is really close, people switch to that spec, and learn to play it, instead of just sticking with their favorite spec.

Making playstyles that are supposed to appeal to a different segment of the playerbase just makes the class less fun to play. If you like Spec A, but Spec B (the experimental spec, like this new Destro or Arcane) does more DPS, you switch to spec B and enjoy your class less. If old school spec A does more DPS, then you switch to Spec A even if the experimental Spec B is what you like to play, you enjoy your class less. On a Mage, unless you're super casual, you're fire for every fight except Spine, even if you hate Fire's RNG, or you really like Arcane's mana system. Trying to tell players "well, if you don't like Fire's RNG, you should just go Arcane" is a false choice, and telling players "if you don't like casting all the time, you should go Destro" will be the same kind of false choice. If Destro does the most DPS, that's what people will play, and if it doesn't, they'll play a different spec.

Choosing what you like to play is a function of your class, not your spec. Blizz, you need to quit trying to use specs to create niche playstyles like this.

You need to assume that Blizz is aiming for the specs to be within a reasonable "reach" of each other regarding net output. Obviously some specs will have an edge on some fights, but the intent is that you can play the spec you like, and bring comparable damage.

Hard-core progression players are exempt, but as you say, they will do anything for that last little bit of DPS. For the larger pool of players, providing a unique playstyle, especially for pure classes, is a great way to differentiate the specs. If all 3 mages had, Arcane/Fire/Frost Blast and Arcane/Fire/Frost Missiles as their primary spells, the specs would be a little boring, personally.

And before you mention that getting specs that close will never happen, haven't Warlocks been the class that Blizz has gotten the most balanced before? Pretty sure, at one point all 3 were roughly the same in output, you brought one or the other for the buff, not the damage difference.

what percentage of the player base do you think knows what the highest dps spec of their class is? Not counting Shadow priests and Retadins.

You need to assume that Blizz is aiming for the specs to be within a reasonable "reach" of each other regarding net output. Obviously some specs will have an edge on some fights, but the intent is that you can play the spec you like, and bring comparable damage.

Its clear, though, and Blizz has as much admitted, that true parity is nearly unattainable. Even if overall parity is achieved, then there will still be specs that are better, as you say, at certain fights. So, if you don't like Arcane, well, tough, if you're doing heroic spine you better be Arcane.

I'm not asking for completely similar specs, like basically the same playstyle but with different icons and spell names, what I'm trying to point out is that making specs wildly different, especially using glaring flaws such as excessive RNG or Arcane's 1 button rotation, doesn't truly present players with true choice, it just forces more players to play a spec you don't like. I don't think the destro changes nearly approach the absurdity level of Mage specs, but the attitude of the devs seem to be similar: "we're going to make this spec annoying to play for some of you. If you don't like that, go play another spec. If the spec you like isn't the one that does the most DPS this tier, well, deal with it or reroll."

If you don't like casting all the time, the solution isn't to create a Warlock spec that doesn't cast all the time. The solution is for people who want to play ranged DPS but with an energy type resource is for these people to play hunters.

Hard-core progression players are exempt, but as you say, they will do anything for that last little bit of DPS. For the larger pool of players, providing a unique playstyle, especially for pure classes, is a great way to differentiate the specs. If all 3 mages had, Arcane/Fire/Frost Blast and Arcane/Fire/Frost Missiles as their primary spells, the specs would be a little boring, personally

Except even casual players tend to switch to the "best" spec, even when they are so bad at it such a switch amounts to a DPS loss for them.

And before you mention that getting specs that close will never happen, haven't Warlocks been the class that Blizz has gotten the most balanced before? Pretty sure, at one point all 3 were roughly the same in output, you brought one or the other for the buff, not the damage difference.

They are close, but they also all bring pretty much the same buffs, or buffs that have so much coverage it is a non-issue. You still don't play the spec you like to play, you play the spec that does the most DPS. Usually, IIRC on ST it flips between Afflic and Destro, and Demo is generally an AE spec, with pretty solid single target as well depending on what CDs are up. Usually some mechanic of the fight favors one of the specs and you play that spec, which is pretty much the same with all the pures.

What I'm saying is, if you don't like casters and casting, don't play a caster. If you don't like hitting things with your weapon, don't play a melee. If you don't like DOTs, you probably shouldn't play a Warlock. If you don't like the resources system of a class, don't play that class. The solution isn't to make the specs so different they play like completely different classes. That will just make it harder to adjust when the inevitable rebalancing takes effect and you have to switch specs again to do competitive DPS. If the goal of this new philosophy is to try to *change* the current paradigm, where you completely switch specs for even the smallest of DPS increases, well, then this is a pretty ham-handed and customer unfriendly way to do it.

Mooclane
85 Tauren Warrior
1820
what percentage of the player base do you think knows what the highest dps spec of their class is? Not counting Shadow priests and Retadins.

Your character is in blues and greens, and has never been in a raid ever, and still is the flavor of the month warrior spec.

The problem with this is, unless you're super-casual joe, you don't play a spec because you like the "unique playstyle". You play a spec because it gives the most DPS. If that spec is Destro, you go Destro whether you like the playstyle or not, and you make it work. Its pretty much accepted that there's going to be a "best spec" out there each patch - even if the DPS is really close, people switch to that spec, and learn to play it, instead of just sticking with their favorite spec.

Only in very top-end progression guilds. At the level of progression you and I are on (essentially identical) I've never seen that being the case, other than avoiding clearly underperforming specs, like Frost or Sub in Wrath.

They are close, but they also all bring pretty much the same buffs, or buffs that have so much coverage it is a non-issue. You still don't play the spec you like to play, you play the spec that does the most DPS.

The solution isn't to make the specs so different they play like completely different classes. That will just make it harder to adjust when the inevitable rebalancing takes effect and you have to switch specs again to do competitive DPS.

You overestimate the ammount of bandwagonjumping if specs are close enough (there's roughly equal numbers of Arcane and Fire mages around, despite Fire topping Arcane, though not by that much really, except in a select few circumstances). And you severely underestimate the importance people put on the playstyle difference between specs (at least Mages tend to, follow the mage forums for a bit. Asking for homogenization of playstyle between mage specs might get you hanged. Maybe warlocks are more shallow and don't care about anything but numbers?).
Sure, there are some sheep that ask "What is the best DPS spec?" but they are irrelevant, since they don't care about playstyle at all, and generally have no idea what they're doing.

02/22/2012 06:48 AMPosted by Felade

Your character is in blues and greens, and has never been in a raid ever, and still is the flavor of the month warrior spec.

Uhm, with Dual spec, there's a bigger chance one of his specs would be what is flavor of the month than not,purely due to chance/preference...

02/22/2012 06:48 AMPosted by Felade

Your character is in blues and greens, and has never been in a raid ever, and still is the flavor of the month warrior spec.

It's an Armory alt.

02/22/2012 06:29 AMPosted by Mooclane

what percentage of the player base do you think knows what the highest dps spec of their class is? Not counting Shadow priests and Retadins.

Regardless, I think Fel's point still stands. There are always people who lag behind the curve a little bit, but at least from my own anecdotal experience (FWIW), most people prefer to play a spec that shows up better on the meters. Just look at the increase in Arms Warriors, Holy Priests, Fire Mages and [Insert FOTM Spec Here] in LFR this past patch. Hell, even if people ARE uninformed on the current, best-performing spec, that doesn't change the fact that they are still probably going to make their choice based on (perceived) performance rather than flavor, even if it's the wrong one.

Choosing what you like to play is a function of your class, not your spec. Blizz, you need to quit trying to use specs to create niche playstyles like this.

And here's where I disagree with you Fel. In fact, I'll argue that the whole point of different, same-role specs is to offer choice of different playstyles. I think it's possible that, if Blizzard is somehow able to balance specs closely enough, that making them varied enough might actually provide enough incentive for people to choose their spec based on playstyle rather than performance.

Mooclane
85 Tauren Warrior
1820
what percentage of the player base do you think knows what the highest dps spec of their class is? Not counting Shadow priests and Retadins.

Your character is in blues and greens, and has never been in a raid ever, and still is the flavor of the month warrior spec.

That still doesn't subtract any credibility from his post. Sorry, posting on a character with Savior of Azeroth or a level 1 doesn't mean anything when you're posting facts.

02/22/2012 07:47 AMPosted by Sphyxx

That still doesn't subtract any credibility from his post. Sorry, posting on a character with Savior of Azeroth or a level 1 doesn't mean anything when you're posting facts.

I didn't see any facts in his post. Just sayin.

02/22/2012 05:45 AMPosted by Felade

The problem with this is, unless you're super-casual joe, you don't play a spec because you like the "unique playstyle". You play a spec because it gives the most DPS.

Actually, that is the problem: that people are forced to play a spec for mechanical reasons rather than for personal enjoyment.

Here's hoping the MOP design allows them to balance performance well enough that most people are freed from those shackles.

So let me get this straight.

Destruction and Demo are having a complete identity crisis in the current game but Blizzard shouldn't fix that because "well not everyone will play it it's 1% below the others?"

The idea is to balance the DPS potential between each other so you can pick and choose based on personal preference. Hunters are in that same spot now. Well, if pet AI didn't suck on the last 3 fights...It shows that they CAN balance the 3 specs around each other decently well.

More variety in the playstyles the better. Unless you're in a high end progression guild, even a 5% theoretical difference can easily be overcome by skill and knowledge of your spec as not many outside of those bleeding edge guilds can even perform close to their spec ceiling.

The problem with this is, unless you're super-casual joe, you don't play a spec because you like the "unique playstyle". You play a spec because it gives the most DPS. If that spec is Destro, you go Destro whether you like the playstyle or not, and you make it work.

All you're really doing is proving why it's pointless for Blizzard to try and balance each class' spec with the other two. Why is your opinion of "Each spec should play the same" true?

02/22/2012 06:48 AMPosted by Felade

Your character is in blues and greens, and has never been in a raid ever, and still is the flavor of the month warrior spec.

Armory attacks just mean you don't have a real point. :/

02/22/2012 07:38 AMPosted by Miz

Regardless, I think Fel's point still stands. There are always people who lag behind the curve a little bit, but at least from my own anecdotal experience (FWIW), most people prefer to play a spec that shows up better on the meters. Just look at the increase in Arms Warriors, Holy Priests, Fire Mages and [Insert FOTM Spec Here] in LFR this past patch. Hell, even if people ARE uninformed on the current, best-performing spec, that doesn't change the fact that they are still probably going to make their choice based on (perceived) performance rather than flavor, even if it's the wrong one.

That's fantastic. And? How does this mean that:

02/22/2012 05:45 AMPosted by Felade

Making playstyles that are supposed to appeal to a different segment of the playerbase just makes the class less fun to play.

Further,

If you like Spec A, but Spec B (the experimental spec, like this new Destro or Arcane) does more DPS, you switch to spec B and enjoy your class less. If old school spec A does more DPS, then you switch to Spec A even if the experimental Spec B is what you like to play, you enjoy your class less.

Is stupid. This "new" Destro or Arcane? How does the new Destro or Arcane fit these criteria, but Arms and Fury, or Combat and Sub don't? They play nothing alike already, so argue it current terms, please.

Choosing what you like to play is a function of your class, not your spec. Blizz, you need to quit trying to use specs to create niche playstyles like this.

I'd also like you to explain what the point of specs is past "one should have the highest dps because it shoots blue missiles rather than red."

Rogues and Warlocks have a pretty healthy spread of people playing the specs, because they are fairly balanced, so I'm not seeing your point.

02/22/2012 06:48 AMPosted by Felade

Your character is in blues and greens, and has never been in a raid ever, and still is the flavor of the month warrior spec.

actually leveled at cata drop as arms, and I'm wearing 358 pvp gear (so at least a few months old) but tyvm. You didn't answer the question though. Most of the playerbase doesn't raid, or come to the forums, or watch videos, or participate in theorycrafting. How many of them do you think are aware of the differences in their specs?

02/22/2012 07:38 AMPosted by Miz

Hell, even if people ARE uninformed on the current, best-performing spec, that doesn't change the fact that they are still probably going to make their choice based on (perceived) performance rather than flavor, even if it's the wrong one.

Why? I mean this is still a game, right? We know most people don't visit the forums, or have any idea what's going on in the real meta. Why not assume people choose to play whatever they think they want to do. We get countless petitions from people who care and want to play spec X, why is is so bizarre to think that there are people who don't care and are playing spec X?

Hi. I'm in the minority I suppose that plays what I think is fun in most scenarios. I was a top 5 BM Hunter and Survival Hunter in both 4.0 and 4.2 raid content.

I can outdps many "top end" specs in my "low end" specs. Therefore your point is invalid and Blizzard's design is intended for people like me and raiders at the more social level.

Besides, unless you're playing world first race, bleeding edge prog, etc etc, you probably aren't going to be really pushing the complete limits of your spec and have the spec ceiling come into account. It's only the top few % of players that can really be concerned with that 1-2% theoretical since they'll be the only ones bumping it.

Warlock A from a social raid guild can easily afford to switch specs based on his playstyle, even though Warlock B pushing firsts is going to go that 1-2% theoretical. There's far more of Warlock A than B.

I thought this thread was about merging tailoring and cooking.

So you want to cripple creativity?

Frankly, unless you're playing a warlock you shouldn't care in the first place. There are plenty of us who are plenty willing to play what we find interesting, even if you would rather have a few hundred dps for playing something you don't enjoy. Beyond that, if you're not going to put this kind of playstyle on warlocks, where else does it go? It's the same "problem" on any class, and unless you want every class in the game to play as "apply two dots, use short cooldown when available, spam filler" then you need to have variety.

Stifling create playstyles because a couple people feel obligated to play whatever is the highest potential dps at any cost doesn't do anything good for the game.

That's fantastic. And? How does this mean that:

02/22/2012 05:45 AMPosted by Felade
Making playstyles that are supposed to appeal to a different segment of the playerbase just makes the class less fun to play.

It doesn't, because that's not the point to which Mooclane (and thus, I) was responding. Unless I misunderstood, Mooclane was disputing the assertion that people choose the spec that performs the best by questioning how many players actually keep up to date on performance by spec. Unrelated, but thanks for playing.

02/22/2012 11:24 AMPosted by Mooclane

Why? I mean this is still a game, right? We know most people don't visit the forums, or have any idea what's going on in the real meta. Why not assume people choose to play whatever they think they want to do.

We can assume that, but we can also go the other way and assume that people choose to play based on the top-performing spec. Like most things in life, it's probably fair to say it's a bit of both.

02/22/2012 11:24 AMPosted by Mooclane

We get countless petitions from people who care and want to play spec X, why is is so bizarre to think that there are people who don't care and are playing spec X?

If we get petitions, it probably means that while they want to play spec X, there is currently something wrong with spec X that prevents them from properly enjoying/playing said spec (again, correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of it seems to be along the lines of "BUFF MAI SPEC PLOX"). So while they may be wanting to play spec X, they ALSO want to play the top performing spec. Of course, I'm not saying that this is preventing some people from playing spec X regardless. But I think it's a big influence for a lot of people (not that it's necessarily a bad thing).

Wait, what were we arguing about again?

02/22/2012 01:23 PMPosted by Miz

It doesn't, because that's not the point to which Mooclane (and thus, I) was responding. Unless I misunderstood, Mooclane was disputing the assertion that people choose the spec that performs the best by questioning how many players actually keep up to date on performance by spec. Unrelated, but thanks for playing.

You said "Regardless, Fel's point still stands..."; How does people switching to FotM rerolls affect the retarded point that specs being different make a class less fun to play?

Choosing what you like to play is a function of your class, not your spec. Blizz, you need to quit trying to use specs to create niche playstyles like this.

Was Fel's end point. Explain how people who are relatively mediocre switching to the highest simcraft spec is at all supporting of this.

Edit:
And as for Mooclane's point, it's valid. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't trump anyone else's. And can the arrogant "thanks for playing."

The problem with this is, unless you're super-casual joe, you don't play a spec because you like the "unique playstyle". You play a spec because it gives the most DPS... even if the DPS is really close, people switch to that spec, and learn to play it, instead of just sticking with their favorite spec.

You void your own argument right here. If people switch over for higher DPS regardless of playstyle, why does the playstyle matter? If higher DPS matters more to me than how a spec feels, I'm just going to learn the new rotation and roll with it.

But regardless of what you say, there actually are people that play the spec they prefer to regardless of maximum theoretical DPS. Some people WILL take a 5-ish% DPS loss to play something they like more. For those who simply play the top spec, it doesn't matter. So why exactly are you bringing this up?