Grimoire of Sacrifice is rendered impotent

90 Human Mage
17680
03/06/2013 12:28 PMPosted by Verdash
Picture if you will a talent where a hunter could forgo their pet and gain 15% crit rating in the pet's place how many sv and mm hunters would jump on that. I would in a heartbeat.

And in a similar manner, it shouldn't be an optimal choice.

Affliction is not a "DOT class", it is a "DOT spec of a pet class". Yes, Locks have had a history of a Sac mechanic (but note: it hasn't been there always, it was removed after TBC at one point).

Regardless of your opinion on the matter, Warlocks are a pet class, and pets will be a significant piece of your toolkit. Simply trading them for a buff is similar to Glyph of Inquisition, an option that removes complexity at the cost of optimal performance.

Whether or not I agree that it should apply, Blizz wants it to apply. And they have a very good reason.

If Sac is ever optimal, even if just for one spec, than you are penalized for using your demons. Even if the net results were equal, you would still be penalized because reaching that optimal performance while using a pet is going to be more complicated than simply sacrificing it.

Blizz doesn't want to invalidate pets. This is why I say Sac should be a glyph, not a talent. As a glyph, it fits in better as an option that trades performance for simplicity. As a talent, it is a talent that "only noobs take", or like last patch, "only noobs don't take", depending on which spec you are and how it impacts your spec.

What you had in TBC, isn't as important as how they want the class to work now. It can be used as a guide, but if something that existed then doesn't make sense now, then it shouldn't be used just because it used to exist.

Now, if you can make it work in a reasonable manner (i.e. an option that has a niche use, or doesn't destroy the class concept), then go for it.


Ok so these are pet classes because YOU say they are pet classes. Being as how you are showing up as beas master.. yeah that's a pet spec for sure. Your pet dies and you have 2 options... either flounder and feign death or rezz your pet because that is a majority of your dps. That's different from what happens when I summon an observer who gets 6th place with his best attack dies. I see the same thing as an sv huntedr...the pet is more along for the ride than it is there for significant dps.

You may be fine with the idea that without your pet, you are nothing, but there is something dirty about being carried...especailly by AI.
Reply Quote
90 Orc Death Knight
8960
03/07/2013 04:22 PMPosted by Melûsine
Ok so these are pet classes because YOU say they are pet classes.


No, they are pet classes because Blizzard says they are pet classes.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Mage
10330
Regardless of your opinion on the matter, Warlocks are a pet class, and pets will be a significant piece of your toolkit. Simply trading them for a buff is similar to Glyph of Inquisition, an option that removes complexity at the cost of optimal performance.


This comparison is not entirely accurate. Glyph of Inquisition simplifies the Ret Paladins rotation but allowing them to ignore the re-application of Inquisition for a longer period of time. The glyph results in a sizable DPS loss.

GrimSac, however, alters the playstyle of the warlock in a more meaningful way. Should a player take it, the damage the pet would have done is instead moved to the warlock. This could, in some cases, make it harder to do more damage. For instance, look at heroic Spirit Kings from T14. This fight requires a lot of organization and movement; basically, it'll take your raid quite a bit of practice to master. The warlock will not be maximizing their DPS here because they'll be worrying about the boss mechanics first. A pet would prove beneficial here, as they are exempt to the boss' shield/AoE mechanic and would require very little management.

The above example is quite specific, I know. What I am trying to show here, though, is that there are benefits to having a pet versus not having one, and, if Sac and the other talents were balanced, it wouldn't always be easier to pull high DPS numbers with Sac. This is quite different than the glyph of inquisition. Sac is much more complex than most glyphs, and shouldn't be de-emphasized to one.

That said, I'll agree that Sac is generally the easier playstyle. And if that comes with a minor DPS loss, then that is okay. It isn't okay, though, if the talent is so much worse that it isn't even a factor.

GrimSac, like many of the warlock changes in MoP, was likely added to improve the versatility of the class and to appeal to more players. There are many people that enjoy the class' playstyle, but do not enjoy having a pet. It should be a goal to balance Sac, rather than gut it, to promote a larger amount of different playstyles.
Reply Quote
90 Human Warlock
12980
First, pet customization isn't a lock thing, your pets are slaves, not you companion. It barely wants to do what you tell it, it isn't going and do something it doesn't want to do if it can avoid it.


That why i Sac it...

@Melûsine - Both hunters and locks are pet classes. Hunter pets and lock pets are different yes, but if you wanted to be a petless caster, roll a mage.


Your intellect is amazing, we are a pet class that isn't a pet class and Mages have no pets... that's all sir you may go now.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Hunter
14735
You may be fine with the idea that without your pet, you are nothing, but there is something dirty about being carried...especailly by AI.

I am not being carried by an AI, and neither is Demo, nor any other pet spec.

03/07/2013 04:22 PMPosted by Melûsine
Being as how you are showing up as beas master.. yeah that's a pet spec for sure.

Has nothing to do with it, I could be a warrior and my statement would be just as accurate.

03/07/2013 06:38 PMPosted by Laanah
This comparison is not entirely accurate. Glyph of Inquisition simplifies the Ret Paladins rotation but allowing them to ignore the re-application of Inquisition for a longer period of time. The glyph results in a sizable DPS loss.

Sac simplifies the aspects of your class you need to keep track of, allowing you to ignore pet mechanics. This talent results in a sizable DPS loss, when compared to other talents.

Other than it being a talent and not a glyph, seems fairly accurate to me. Hence why I said Sac should be a glyph, and you should have a third talent, one that doesn't work off your primary pet - something like spawns a "buff only" pet based on Specialization. This would give you 2 options to use with the glyph (Service & the "buff pet").

GrimSac, however, alters the playstyle of the warlock in a more meaningful way. Should a player take it, the damage the pet would have done is instead moved to the warlock. This could, in some cases, make it harder to do more damage. For instance, look at heroic Spirit Kings from T14. This fight requires a lot of organization and movement; basically, it'll take your raid quite a bit of practice to master. The warlock will not be maximizing their DPS here because they'll be worrying about the boss mechanics first. A pet would prove beneficial here, as they are exempt to the boss' shield/AoE mechanic and would require very little management.

Exactly why I think it should be a glyph. It does have its niche uses, but outside of those, sac'ing your pet should not be the optimal playstyle, not for a pet class. And yes, I know Sac is of a different complexity than the Inq Glyph, but they are similar...just on entirely different levels of "playstyle alteration".

GrimSac, like many of the warlock changes in MoP, was likely added to improve the versatility of the class and to appeal to more players. There are many people that enjoy the class' playstyle, but do not enjoy having a pet. It should be a goal to balance Sac, rather than gut it, to promote a larger amount of different playstyles.

Yet another point that I don't disagree with. Just further emphasizes that Sac would work better as a glyph, and not a talent.

That why i Sac it...

Because your control over your demon is so fragile, its better to consume is strength, rather than directly utilizing it? No problem with the Sac mechanic, it just shouldn't be optimal (outside of niche uses).
Reply Quote
90 Human Warlock
17000
I still think Sac being the opposite of Service, in it being a cooldown that sacrifices your pet for a temporary boost (and resummons it at the end) would be the most compelling, yet fitting with the theme of Warlocks and keeping pets prominent.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Mage
10330
sac'ing your pet should not be the optimal playstyle


This seems to be the central point to your arguments. I agree - While GrimSac is not the "easiest" talent in every situation, it is likely the easiest overall. I wouldn't mind it if it wasn't the best option. At that point, I could spec into GrimSup or GrimService for a bit more DPS, or GrimSac for convenience or pet-unfriendly encounters. I just don't see the need for a significant disparity between the talents.

I do disagree strongly with the glyph suggestion, though.

Sac is of a different complexity than the Inq Glyph, but they are similar...just on entirely different levels of "playstyle alteration".


I'd argue that the level is so different that they are hardly comparable. Switching from a pet-based DPS system to a more self-reliant build is very significant. It is something that should stay, and something that should be a major part of the class. Like I said - It doesn't need to be optimal. But it should remain a talent, it should remain relevant, and it should not be gutted. This entire tier of talents offers a considerable amount of customization; if anything, more classes should follow this example.
Reply Quote
90 Human Warlock
16105
I still think Sac being the opposite of Service, in it being a cooldown that sacrifices your pet for a temporary boost (and resummons it at the end) would be the most compelling, yet fitting with the theme of Warlocks and keeping pets prominent.


No thank you. Do not want.

I'd rather Sac remain as is and be a dps loss than have it be just another pet spec talent with a different flavour.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Hunter
14735
03/08/2013 12:51 AMPosted by Laanah
But it should remain a talent, it should remain relevant, and it should not be gutted.

That is the problem. Since it shouldn't be optimal (opinion I know, but it should be viable, I don't argue that - it can even be optimal for niche scenarios, i.e. an Atramedes style fight with lots of flight time, although using an imp alleviates some of those issues), it will always (or nearly always) be a loss to use that talent compared to the others.

While you can't avoid talents being stronger than the other, this is the only case where it would be by design for one talent to be "weaker" than the others, and that just doesn't sit with me as a good design. That is the only reason I think it would make a better glyph than a talent. It can work as a (sub-optimal yet still viable) talent, but it just doesn't fit well.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Mage
10330
03/08/2013 03:59 AMPosted by Verdash
this is the only case where it would be by design for one talent to be "weaker" than the others, and that just doesn't sit with me as a good design.


There are talents with this already in place, though. The Mage T6 talents feature this. Both RoP and Invocation will provide increased DPS if used correctly, but IW can be used for a passive DPS buff. IW is undoubtedly the easiest mechanic of the three, so it offers a bit less. I actually find this to be good design. A player can select RoP / Invocation and manage their T6 talent, or select IW, pull a bit less (Possibly), but they are less restricted. This can be a good thing for players that are not trying to min/max in every situation.

Also, if Sac was mathematically a bit lower than the other two options, that wouldn't make it always lower. There are certainly pet-unfriendly encounters that would likely result in Sac being preferable. That'd be a cool design, I think: Sup / Service providing more DPS in ideal situations, with Sac being slightly behind, but better in pet-unfriendly situations.

At the least, it'd make the talents more dynamic. I enjoy talent swapping on my Spriest as the encounter demands as it keeps things interesting.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Hunter
14735
There are talents with this already in place, though. The Mage T6 talents feature this. Both RoP and Invocation will provide increased DPS if used correctly, but IW can be used for a passive DPS buff. IW is undoubtedly the easiest mechanic of the three, so it offers a bit less. I actually find this to be good design. A player can select RoP / Invocation and manage their T6 talent, or select IW, pull a bit less (Possibly), but they are less restricted. This can be a good thing for players that are not trying to min/max in every situation.


In all three of the mage cases though, the intent is for the talents to be more or less equal (at least until fight mechanics shift it in favor of one or the other).

Blizz's stance is that petless locks should be less optimal than locks with pets. Outside of extreme niche cases at least (i.e. soloing old content with MC effects).

That is why I think it would be a better glyph. It can work as a talent, for the reasons you mention later, and it probably should stay as one until at least 6.0 (a slightly sub-optimal talent for general usage), but I still think it fits the intent of glyphs better is all.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Mage
10330
Sac has a more significant effect on Warlocks than any glyph in the entire game. It affects their stat priority, alters a significant portion of damage from pet AI to player-controlled, and offers a completely different playstyle experience. It really wouldn't make sense as a glyph.

It fits in well as a talent. It is a meaningful decision that has a huge affect on how you play. Talents should be like this.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Hunter
14735
Sac has a more significant effect on Warlocks than any glyph in the entire game. It affects their stat priority, alters a significant portion of damage from pet AI to player-controlled, and offers a completely different playstyle experience. It really wouldn't make sense as a glyph.

It fits in well as a talent. It is a meaningful decision that has a huge affect on how you play. Talents should be like this.

Glyph of Demon Hunting
Also another fairly extensive glyph. Glyphs (major specifically) should also have a noticeably impact. Granted, I would say Sac as a glyph would be raising the bar even more than Demon Hunting.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Mage
10330
Demon hunting isn't like Sac at all, either, though I could see the confusion. Demon Hunting is not used in any real DPS scenario. The glyph is extensive, yes, but has minimal impact on high-end group play.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Hunter
14735
Demon hunting isn't like Sac at all, either, though I could see the confusion. Demon Hunting is not used in any real DPS scenario. The glyph is extensive, yes, but has minimal impact on high-end group play.

Just because the result or reason for it is different, doesn't mean that the level of complexity doesn't matter, your point was glyphs are not meant to be as complex as Talents can be, yet we have Demon Hunting.

My point is that talents where never meant to be sub-optimal in the majority of cases. Blizz intends for Sac to be sub-optimal in the majority of cases, for reasons that actually make sense (why bother being a pet class where the optimal choice is to go petless)

Why is it such a problem that a "pet class" has a way to alleviate itself of the pain in the !@# known as the pet system of this game. Seriously I don't get it.

It isn't, I have no issue at all with the mechanic itself. Just that it shouldn't be a talent (it should be a glyph), and it shouldn't be an optimal choice except in niche cases.
Edited by Verdash on 3/8/2013 5:13 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Human Warlock
13045
03/07/2013 06:38 PMPosted by Laanah
GrimSac, however, alters the playstyle of the warlock in a more meaningful way.


But it doesn't alter my play, not in the least, and that's kinda my point. I refuse to macro/hotkey/babysit a pet. My personal view is that it should work the way it is supposed to work without any additional effort on my part. When I press my Corruption button, I expect Corruption to be applied to my target; I shouldn't have to press my Corruption button AND dance a jig AND blink my eyes three times AND tap two additional keys in sequence AND have another ability macro'd in just for basic optimal functionality.

At least with GrimSac my attitude doesn't directly cost me DPS.
Edited by Setekh on 3/8/2013 5:39 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Worgen Warlock
18570
Sac is going to outscale by end of tier so for now there are some theoretical gains at the low end. EG with lots of sim tuning I can get the two within a couple hundred dps of each other on a 115K'ish scale (500ilvl)....at least for affliction.

Destro seems to have taken too harsh a kick in the groin from sac changes. This is especially noticeable in pvp "feel" and pve meters. Destro was the original petless (though aff playing with a "banished" imp as a mana battery is functionally the same thing) so thematically or historically this also is overkill. No matter how you change it I can't get the pet vs petless options even close. Even if you try to work around it in pve via pet micro you can't in pvp.

Demo IMO should be the spec that always uses a pet unless they went for demo as legit tanks (which isn't happening, at least not this expac). Since nobody has used demo sac since the week and a half you could swifty macro 2x CW and hope for a double crit gib then demo rebirth your pet its pretty much moot. I'm glad demo got some love, inferior pet scaling means it will probably need it on a regular basis to keep pace with other specs due to its weaker secondary stat scaling.
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)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]