15% less damage taken (spriest, lock,boom)...

90 Blood Elf Death Knight
5445


Not really, Shadow has 1 defensive and so does boomkin and boomkin's is lol. It was never game breaking in pve and absolutely needed in pvp.


It was gamebreaking in PvE and also increased the value of absorbs, which they want to be lessened. The amount of damage prevented by passive damage reduction modifiers is pretty astounding when you start number crunching.

It's easy to compensate in PvP though by simply providing that specialization a resilience bonus passive.


how exactly was it game-breaking in pve? did it make encounters faceroll? did it cause those classes to ignore them? did it suddenly allow those classes to tank? No it did none of these things. It was not "Game breaking" at all because it broke no aspect of the game unlike the changes on the ptr did.
Edited by Fayte on 6/15/2013 10:21 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Hunter
16400


It was gamebreaking in PvE and also increased the value of absorbs, which they want to be lessened. The amount of damage prevented by passive damage reduction modifiers is pretty astounding when you start number crunching.

It's easy to compensate in PvP though by simply providing that specialization a resilience bonus passive.


how exactly was it game-breaking in pve? did it make encounters faceroll? did it cause those classes to ignore them? did it suddenly allow those classes to tank? No it did none of these things. It was not "Game breaking" at all because it broke no aspect of the game unlike the changes on the ptr did.

So many passive damage reduction values was drastically increasing the value of absorption effects and reducing the value of straight healing.

Shaman, Hunters, Shadow Priests, Balance Druids, Rogues, Warlocks all have considerable passive damage reduction. Do a fight like Heroic Council or Megaera and you start seeing where that passive damage reduction is an absolute !@#$ load of healing saved.

The changes on the PTR can easily be compensated in PvP by providing additional resilience as a specialization passive.
Edited by Bullettime on 6/15/2013 11:53 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
4790
FYI, shamans and rogues do not have passive damage reduction. With the new glyph of lightning shield shamans have 10% damage reduction for 6s after lightning shield triggers, but most boss AE and ground effects don't trigger lightning shield. Rogues don't have any passive damage reduction at all; they need to use feint, which is active, costing energy and a GCD.

In fact, the only remaining passive damage reduction in 5.3 belongs to the tanks (who obviously need it) and hunters with aspect of the iron hawk.

(Please don't bring up rockbiter weapon as an example of passive data reduction. I will laugh.)
Edited by Slant on 6/15/2013 12:43 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Goblin Warlock
15065
This change makes some sort of sense for warlocks, at least. It sucks to lose the passive mitigation, but I'd rather lose that than watch our active mitigation get shot full of holes.


Except locks JUST got that buff like what in 5.1?

All they needed to do was change it to "damage taken from players and their minions reduced by X" not remove it completely. It was in fact meant to be a pve nerf.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Warrior
13200
I want to ask this question seriously.

There is talk about these classes being compensated for the loss in passive damage reduction. Why do you feel that you need to be compensated for Blizz taking something away?

When warriors had lost the option of fighting in defensive stance (which was needed due to all the burst and CC at the time) we didn't receive any compensation in terms of damage or survivability. We just had to make due with that option being taken away and use it only situationally.

This isn't meant to start a flame war and get people upset, it's an honest question as to why there is the beliefe that these classes will need to be compensated in terms of more damage or other forms of survivability.
Reply Quote
90 Goblin Warlock
15065
double post
Edited by Purebalance on 6/15/2013 3:58 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Hunter
16400
I want to ask this question seriously.

There is talk about these classes being compensated for the loss in passive damage reduction. Why do you feel that you need to be compensated for Blizz taking something away?

When warriors had lost the option of fighting in defensive stance (which was needed due to all the burst and CC at the time) we didn't receive any compensation in terms of damage or survivability. We just had to make due with that option being taken away and use it only situationally.

This isn't meant to start a flame war and get people upset, it's an honest question as to why there is the beliefe that these classes will need to be compensated in terms of more damage or other forms of survivability.

Because the nerf to their damage reduction is a PvE motivated change that negatively impacts PvP performance when it didn't need to be.

Removing the damage reduction then providing them more resilience keeps them the same in PvP while making the damage reduction less of an issue in raids.
Reply Quote
90 Human Paladin
10165
In fact, the only remaining passive damage reduction in 5.3 belongs to the tanks (who obviously need it) and hunters with aspect of the iron hawk.


Ret too. With Glyph of TV we can have 10% damage reduction just about full-time.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
4790
Ret too. With Glyph of TV we can have 10% damage reduction just about full-time.

Good catch, forgot about that. Do any rets not take that glyph? It should be baseline.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Death Knight
5445
So many passive damage reduction values was drastically increasing the value of absorption effects and reducing the value of straight healing.

Shaman, Hunters, Shadow Priests, Balance Druids, Rogues, Warlocks all have considerable passive damage reduction. Do a fight like Heroic Council or Megaera and you start seeing where that passive damage reduction is an absolute !@#$ load of healing saved.

The changes on the PTR can easily be compensated in PvP by providing additional resilience as a specialization passive.


i dont know if you are aware of this or not but you have not mention how it is game breaking but lets use mag as an example.

It has existed well before MoP and the fact that most of the changes on the ptr were directed at pvp so far leads me to believe this is a pvp change. "oh they can fix it later by adding more base resil" is something they have never done before and is likely something they will not do. Pve it wont make a difference, guilds wont suddenly die more because of this change and to my knowledge they did not say the change was because of pve. This change was purely for pvp and while warlock may be able to deal with it bcz of thier arsenal or defensive, it will cripple Spriest and especially boomkins.

Because the nerf to their damage reduction is a PvE motivated change that negatively impacts PvP performance when it didn't need to be.

Removing the damage reduction then providing them more resilience keeps them the same in PvP while making the damage reduction less of an issue in raids.


hunters get to keep theirs so its all good i guess.
Edited by Fayte on 6/16/2013 5:12 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Warrior
13200
I want to ask this question seriously.

There is talk about these classes being compensated for the loss in passive damage reduction. Why do you feel that you need to be compensated for Blizz taking something away?

When warriors had lost the option of fighting in defensive stance (which was needed due to all the burst and CC at the time) we didn't receive any compensation in terms of damage or survivability. We just had to make due with that option being taken away and use it only situationally.

This isn't meant to start a flame war and get people upset, it's an honest question as to why there is the beliefe that these classes will need to be compensated in terms of more damage or other forms of survivability.


Because the nerf to their damage reduction is a PvE motivated change that negatively impacts PvP performance when it didn't need to be.

Removing the damage reduction then providing them more resilience keeps them the same in PvP while making the damage reduction less of an issue in raids.


I can see where you're coming from, but can it be said though that with these classes taking more damage in PvP situations will drastically see the classes drop off in representation?

What I mean is, will these changes effect the actual classes to the point that their representation in the PvP ladders where Blizz balances classes will drop simply because they are taking more damage from other players?

Or will the representation drop due to per-conceived notions by the players themselves that the extra damage taken will make their class a sitting a duck and therefore move onto another class, maybe one that got a damage buff or didn't lose anything, just so that they feel like they are being competetive, or else teams dropping them for other classes cause they don't like the idea of one or their teammates suddenly taking more damage and don't want to have work harder then they have to?

If the former is true and that the actual increased damage the classes are taking is making them easier kills and thus being pushed out of the Ladder levels balances at, I can see them some sort of compensation being need.

But it the Ladder situation is true, then no compensation will be needed -or justifiable- as it is literally the players themselves looking for the path of least resistance to achieve the higher points in PvP.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Druid
14580
What I mean is, will these changes effect the actual classes to the point that their representation in the PvP ladders where Blizz balances classes will drop simply because they are taking more damage from other players?

Or will the representation drop due to per-conceived notions by the players themselves that the extra damage taken will make their class a sitting a duck and therefore move onto another class, maybe one that got a damage buff or didn't lose anything, just so that they feel like they are being competetive, or else teams dropping them for other classes cause they don't like the idea of one or their teammates suddenly taking more damage and don't want to have work harder then they have to?

If the former is true and that the actual increased damage the classes are taking is making them easier kills and thus being pushed out of the Ladder levels balances at, I can see them some sort of compensation being need.

But it the Ladder situation is true, then no compensation will be needed -or justifiable- as it is literally the players themselves looking for the path of least resistance to achieve the higher points in PvP.

To keep it simple:
Why would I willingly subject myself to the worst gaming experience this game has ever offered? I have awful CC (yes, it's decent if I can cast it....IF....but I'm being trained to death...so I'm not casting anything). I have awful damage output in PVP (let a moonkin freecast and you lose, sit on the moonkin and you get your points). I have Barkskin...and only Barkskin (...seriously.) My only chance to live is not to outplay someone, but to run away. Every single class can outheal my damage output while I'm pressured. I can hardly keep up with DK diseases by literally spamming rejuv on myself, I simply lose if a DK is able to attack me.

Let me ask you this: Would you willingly play a specc with purely RNG burst, extremely risky offensive control, virtually no defenses, and sustained damage that rivals Searing Totem? Now remove your 15% damage reduction. That is the current state of Moonkin PvP.
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Hunter
16400
So many passive damage reduction values was drastically increasing the value of absorption effects and reducing the value of straight healing.

Shaman, Hunters, Shadow Priests, Balance Druids, Rogues, Warlocks all have considerable passive damage reduction. Do a fight like Heroic Council or Megaera and you start seeing where that passive damage reduction is an absolute !@#$ load of healing saved.

The changes on the PTR can easily be compensated in PvP by providing additional resilience as a specialization passive.


i dont know if you are aware of this or not but you have not mention how it is game breaking but lets use mag as an example.

It has existed well before MoP and the fact that most of the changes on the ptr were directed at pvp so far leads me to believe this is a pvp change. "oh they can fix it later by adding more base resil" is something they have never done before and is likely something they will not do. Pve it wont make a difference, guilds wont suddenly die more because of this change and to my knowledge they did not say the change was because of pve. This change was purely for pvp and while warlock may be able to deal with it bcz of thier arsenal or defensive, it will cripple Spriest and especially boomkins.

Because the nerf to their damage reduction is a PvE motivated change that negatively impacts PvP performance when it didn't need to be.

Removing the damage reduction then providing them more resilience keeps them the same in PvP while making the damage reduction less of an issue in raids.


hunters get to keep theirs so its all good i guess.


We're keeping it because it's a talent, but it was still nerfed. Ghostcrawler even stated this. The ones they're nerfing are spec passive modifiers that exist for the sake of existing.

Ghostcrawler also openly stated that it was a PvE motivated change and they're likely going to be compensating by a resilience boost for PvP for them.

Do you not even read his twitter feed or do you just like to post useless garbage that has already had an answer to? You tend to do this a lot.
Edited by Bullettime on 6/16/2013 12:24 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Death Knight
5445
We're keeping it because it's a talent, but it was still nerfed. Ghostcrawler even stated this. The ones they're nerfing are spec passive modifiers that exist for the sake of existing.

Ghostcrawler also openly stated that it was a PvE motivated change and they're likely going to be compensating by a resilience boost for PvP for them.

Do you not even read his twitter feed or do you just like to post useless garbage that has already had an answer to? You tend to do this a lot.


Please spare me. You play a hunter, you dont even play the classes in a raiding environment to tell the noticeable difference nor do play the healers that are healing them.

Oh lets qoute GC because he sure as hell didnt say it was for pve only:

"We changed the passive damage reduction on some ranged DPS for both PvP and PvE concerns."

Unlike you tho ill cite it: https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/status/345280796036304896

Nowhere does he say he is going to raise their resil to compensate because it would contradict the statement he made above.

Typical huntard thinking he knows what he is talking about and is actually the person who post "useless garbage". You tend to do this a lot.
Edited by Fayte on 6/16/2013 5:25 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Hunter
16365
For you Fayte,

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9281758898?page=2#37

And just because bullet got the "source" of the information wrong is NO reason for you to use insults.
Reply Quote
90 Human Priest
13960
Unique is bad.

- Ghostcrawler, 2013
Reply Quote
They can simply provide bonus resilience to the specs if they're too squishy in PvP.


The best solution to nerf PvE without nerfing PvP but they WON'T--why, I don't know. (Well, I do, but I don't want to get banned from the forums again for speaking my mind/the truth.)
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Death Knight
5445
For you Fayte,

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9281758898?page=2#37

And just because bullet got the "source" of the information wrong is NO reason for you to use insults.


Actually i didn't start the insults, the other person did. Furthermore, the link you sent basically said "we have other options if we need to" it did not actually say if they were actually going to implement them or not. But im sure you knew that.
Reply Quote
90 Human Priest
8995
It wasn't gamebreaking, because the game didn't, you know, break. But I can imagine it's hard to balance for some players taking 15% less damage than others.


Yeah it so hard, that's why shadow has had this damage reduction from the beginning of time and its never been an issue. To me this change is so major for these 3 classes, most for boomkin and spriest, that it should wait until then next expansion.
Reply Quote
90 Human Priest
3650
Guys, the latest Blue Post:

Patch 5.4 Shadowform Change
This change (along with the other passive damage reduction changes) is something we're going to balance around. We're just extremely early in the PTR cycle at the moment, so that balancing hasn't taken place yet.

To give some insight as to where we're headed, we wanted to chill out on some of the passive damage reduction in favor of moving to more active sources of mitigation. It just doesn't feel very good to have certain players in your raid (for example) who always take more damage from the big hits than others, even though neither player is doing anything special. We'd rather the players themselves be more in control.

For those concerned about the impact this will have in PvP, there are plenty of other ways we can balance things out that do not carry over into the other parts of the game. Resilience is an obvious example, but there's plenty of knobs that can be tweaked to make that feel right.

---------

so, can we wait for the next set of patch notes before we conclude?
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]