Can we at least have Inquisition off GCD?

90 Human Paladin
6495
Im perfectly fine with blizzards current stance on where they think ret should fit on the totem pole in the world of PvP. Alot of people seem to disagree with that but a class with so much support utility shouldn't be putting down the same numbers as a pure DPS class.

the PvP Power affecting healing news has brightened my day a bit and look forward to seeing how we fare post 5.2....

But in the PvP world one GCD is a long time, alot can happen. I don't mind the ramp up time to 3/2/1 Holy Power->Inquistion but honestly the fact it still on the GCD is a bit absurd. Its just putting more time between us and our subpar DPS. And giving more time for other classes to inflict serious pain on us. Its a small change that would go pretty far.

What would you ret players think of this if this was implemented?

And any justification from system designers why not?
Edited by Macnameddre on 1/14/2013 3:19 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
7270
I've always thought that the build up of HP just to use inquisition then to build it up again for TV takes too much time in retrospect to other dps classes.

take offf GCD pweassse :)
Reply Quote
100 Human Paladin
20625
If they insist on keeping it, then yeah - take it off the GCD.
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Paladin
10075
PLEASE!!!! x 1000

I've always thought that the build up of HP just to use inquisition then to build it up again for TV takes too much time in retrospect to other dps classes.

take offf GCD pweassse :)
Reply Quote
I dont use Inquisition unless Im about to burst, or if I have HP left over from a fight. Youre right, things happen to fast, its often not worth it.
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Paladin
18710
Holy Prism granting a charge of holy power would help with getting InQ up if you're a little ways away from the target.

Doubt they take it off the GCD
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
9630
I've been against Inquisition since its implementation and vehemently protested against it to no avail in MoP Beta. I despise the design and intention of a "maintenance buff" and prefer "proc-based" game-play over it by far.

That is the part that really gets me. Ret is already almost all "proc-based" and "resource building" anyways, except for this one strange maintenance buff that feels very out of place in the rotation. This is something I've wanted to ask GC about for the longest time, but, given the lack of any dev post on the subject of Inquisition, I'm not going to get my hopes up.

And yes, I know that this is all my opinion and perception. However, given the amount of forum posts I've seen about this everywhere, I know that I am certainly not alone on this one.

Edit: As far as an idea of what I think it should be: I think it should be turned into a passive or removed completely. I believe that the current ret paladin already has enough in their damage toolkit (not to mention support, heals, etc) to be perfectly fine without it; as evidenced by the many people who leveled without using it.

The annoyance of a maintenance buff that provides a direct power increase is that most players will feel obligated to have it up all the time, thus making it "mandatory". Which is a given, because who wants to do x% less dmg when they could be doing x% more? Not too many, I'm afraid.
Edited by Tsura on 1/15/2013 12:13 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
6170
I'd rather see VT/DS refresh the duration...
Reply Quote
12 Orc Shaman
13115
01/14/2013 03:18 AMPosted by Macnameddre
But in the PvP world one GCD is a long time

GCD is a long time in random BGs, huh?

Inq is fine, I don't get why there is like 8 threads of crying about it
Reply Quote

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)

Reported!

[Close]