It's not an arms race if casters are mobile.

90 Blood Elf Warlock
4935
I absolutely love how some people exaggerate this concept of an "arms" race and seem to imply that destroying this amazingly perfect niche of immobile casters will destroy the fragile ecosystem that is the balance between ranged and melee and bring about he TOTAL DOOM OF THE GAME AS WE KNOW IT.

Or we can, you know, stop using hyperbole and examine the concept of immobile casters as the archaic and nonsensical niche that it is.

I see much defense for the change, but people never actually mention- why is this type of niche, a good niche? There was certainly no deliberation in the early onset of the game, or the origin of games in particular, inf act, that this was the best way to balance melee. It was ismply how games were made, and not much thought was put into the creation of this ideal where castes it still to cast their spells.

Looking at it rationally, there is nothing sacred about it. There's no special quality to immobile casters, no perfect balance.

It is simply a niche, one of many niches. One of the many facets of the game is mobility, and mobility bears no superiority compared to other factors such as cleave, or DPS, or survivability.

It is simply, an aspect.

The big difference between mobility and other features, in reality, is that too little of it makes the game exponentially less fun. Survivability can be made up for with mobility, DPS can be made up for with utility, burst can be made up for with spread pressure.

But nothing in the game can ever make a person feel content without having a significant amount of mobility.

Removing this niche from melee won't destroy the role, the type, or the game. It will simply require that Blizzard develops a new niche for the melee class.

That doesn't mean we're going to have increasingly excessive CC or gap-closers; do you really think the game is so limited? Do you really think there are not hundreds of other features that could be given to melee specifically more-so than casters? Survivability, cleave, AoE, pressure, AoE cleave, powerful cool-downs, less AoE damage taken, auto-follow on the enemy when auto-attacking, more utility, and tons of other features all come to mind.

I'm tired of people putting mobility on the "OP pedestal". Its only special property is that it adds to fun more than any of the others, but that certainly doesn't make it OP. It makes it a would-be critical element of all classes.
Reply Quote
90 Human Warrior
12020
That doesn't mean we're going to have increasingly excessive CC or gap-closers; do you really think the game is so limited? Do you really think there are not hundreds of other features that could be given to melee specifically more-so than casters? Survivability, cleave, AoE, pressure, AoE cleave, powerful cool-downs, less AoE damage taken, auto-follow on the enemy when auto-attacking, more utility, and tons of other features all come to mind.


Survivability: Hah. You see how much casters are crying about losing their passive damage reductions? Now imagine that melee were given across the board a 10-15% damage reduction to make them more survivable. The QQ would be way worse.

Cleave/AoE/AoE Cleave: These are all highly situational to the fight. And I doubt that casters would appreciate having their cleave and multidotting capability taken away, or their other AoE tools reduced, to make this a valid melee niche.

Powerful Cooldowns: Offensively this turns melee into burst monsters, which is fine, and there are several specs that already follow this paradigm, but making it a melee thing in general is too homogenous. As it is now there are bursty and steady specs available to both melee and ranged. Shifting this around to make sure only melee has the strong cooldowns doesn't help. If you meant defensive cooldowns, this means more nerfs for casters who have generally better defensive cooldowns than melee.

Reduced AoE damage taken: This is actually a good place to introduce some more survivability to melee, since they're frequently in areas where they are taking high AoE damage regardless of what they do.

Auto-Follow enemy while auto attacking: What?

More utility: Nice to say. Harder to implement.

And overall, even if melee were given advantages in the areas you specified (some or all), it would help guarantee their presence in raids, but would not do anything about the PVP ramifications of casters being always mobile. Because the answer to a mobile ranged caster is: 1) Be more mobile than that caster, 2) Be able to close the gap to that caster (this is different from 1) 3) CC that caster 4) be ranged yourself. Having great AoE doesn't help if you can't attack the enemy. Having great utility means !@#$ if you can't attack. Awesome survivability just prolongs the inevitable. The best cooldowns in the game won't do anything if you don't have uptime to use them.

In the end, for melee to function they need the ability to get into melee and stay there. Casters deal with casting mechanics and are less mobile to allow opportunities for that to happen. If you ever had a caster who had the same mobility as a melee and could deal their full damage on the move, the melee will lose, 100% of the time. Many of your suggestions would help cement a niche for melee in a PVE environment (though would have consequences that would make casters howl far more than the KJC nerf is), but would not make a lick of difference in a PVP environment.
Reply Quote
90 Worgen Warrior
6825
06/16/2013 07:12 PMPosted by Divergent
Removing this niche from melee won't destroy the role, the type, or the game. It will simply require that Blizzard develops a new niche for the melee class.


Such as?

06/16/2013 07:12 PMPosted by Divergent
Survivability


Tanks already have this as their niche. That's kind of their point. If I wanted to play a tank... I'D PLAY A TANK.

cleave, AoE, pressure


Not every fight is a cleave fight, and the balance team shouldn't feel pressured to make every fight a cleave fight, just so melee won't get sat.

powerful cool-downs


We have powerful CD's. At the start of a fight, I can burst for 250k dps. When I get more gear it will be for a lot more. I have almost 100% crit chance, 20% crit damage, a DoT based on damage or 30% extra damage, combined with trinkets. My CD's are fine.

less AoE damage taken


That would be either worthless or gamebreaking, and there's no middle ground there. Either healers notice it enough to stack melee on AoE fights, (or it disrupts PvP) or it's a boost, but it's still meh enough that healers work less and get more out of bringing more ranged.

auto-follow on the enemy when auto-attacking


That would be a terrible nerf. On Horridon, I can lock down two poison priests myself with high mobility. I pummel the first, intervene to the tank who picks up the second where I cast disrupting shout, then leap back to my original target where I pummel again. You can't do that crap if you're fighting some buggy auto attack mechanic. It would strip melee of the only thing it is good at as of late.

more utility


Like what? I mean really? Warriors and Pallies already bring some great CD's for utility. The point is, there are some mechanics you LITERALLY CANNOT DO WITHOUT RANGED, but no converse because minimum range requirements have been removed and ranged are more mobile. Making melee glorified buff bots like Vanilla Pallies won't make this better.

EDIT: Enh can bring heroism, which is the most important CD to a raid, bar none.
DK's / Feral Druids can bring B Rez, probably the second most important
Pallies Bring BoP and other neat Pally things I don't know about.
Warriors bring unique buffs: crit damage, 20% health to the raid.

The fact that melee already have access to great utility isn't helping, because... A: Ranged has the same utility, so they bring it along with the guarantee that there are no fights they'll be terrible at, if mobile. B: In the case of Warriors, I don't see it guaranteeing warriors any raid spots. So even giving us unique utility isn't cutting it in a world where DPS / Snap Mechanics are king.


and tons of other features all come to mind.


Keep them coming, and I can keep shooting them down. If it really were so easy, it would have been implemented already. Every one of your suggestions is shortsighted and missing the point.

You ranged want the entire game to change around you, because suddenly you want to get all the toys melee get, at a 40 yard range advantage. It really is that simple, and it's absurd.
Edited by Kitethis on 6/16/2013 11:23 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Human Warlock
12005
06/16/2013 11:16 PMPosted by Kitethis
Not every fight is a cleave fight, and the balance team shouldn't feel pressured to make every fight a cleave fight, just so melee won't get sat.


Why would every fight need to be a melee fight?
Reply Quote
90 Human Priest
11615
You had KJC for 2 tiers, you will be fine without it.

These threads are worse than when rogues lost cloak and dagger with dance.
Reply Quote
You had KJC for 2 tiers, you will be fine without it.

These threads are worse than when rogues lost cloak and dagger with dance.


They had it for 1 tier, the current one. The older tier was completed I'm almost positive 100% before KJC stopped being a 30% increased cast time debuff that nobody used.

If you want to be really leniant for the people that were not done with HoF and Terrace before KJC was changed to its current form then I'll give you 1.5 tiers.

Anyways.... you have three options as dps in raids that makes sense.

1) Melee - you take more damage and if the boss moves, you have to chase him or lose dps.
2) Ranged - you take less damage and if the boss spits at you, you have to move and lose dps.
3) Mobile Ranged - you take less damage and don't care if you have to move, but you do less damage than the other comparable dps classes. (See hunters and ele shammies)

Each of these types are good, though melee can be argued on some fights to be more trouble than they are worth healing.

The big issue is that KJC gave you mobility without a loss in potential damage. If you had to pay for being mobile by getting 5-10% of your damage lopped off every spell you do, would the mobility be worth it? That is what hunter's and shaman deal with. Both of those classes (spec for shaman) only do well in some fights this tier because their aoe carries them in places.

If you want KJC to remain how it is, then you have to give up being near the top of the damage meters and accept that the only time your class is going to rank very often is when demo can aoe alot of targets or something like that.

I doubt you want that.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
4935
Survivability: Hah. You see how much casters are crying about losing their passive damage reductions? Now imagine that melee were given across the board a 10-15% damage reduction to make them more survivable. The QQ would be way worse.


The threads on Warlocks losing KJC are bigger than the QQ about losing caster defenses.

Hell one thread about the KJC change is bigger than all the other threads combined.

The problem is that they are killing our survivability, and mobility, at the same time. We need either of those or melee gets the advantage. CC works too, and ironically they gave us mor eCC when the game, simply put, does NOT need more CC.

Cleave/AoE/AoE Cleave: These are all highly situational to the fight. And I doubt that casters would appreciate having their cleave and multidotting capability taken away, or their other AoE tools reduced, to make this a valid melee niche.


I doubt casters would complain much at all if they gained the ability to move and cast.

Powerful Cooldowns: Offensively this turns melee into burst monsters, which is fine, and there are several specs that already follow this paradigm, but making it a melee thing in general is too homogenous. As it is now there are bursty and steady specs available to both melee and ranged. Shifting this around to make sure only melee has the strong cooldowns doesn't help. If you meant defensive cooldowns, this means more nerfs for casters who have generally better defensive cooldowns than melee.


Obviously casters are going to get nerfs one way or the other, but it's a lot better to lose some survivability and keep mobility rather than lose some mobility and keep survivability.
Defenses are great for casters, but being mobile puts survival distinctly in your hands, and is much better for casters over all.

06/16/2013 10:53 PMPosted by Secondwind
Reduced AoE damage taken: This is actually a good place to introduce some more survivability to melee, since they're frequently in areas where they are taking high AoE damage regardless of what they do.


Agreed.

Auto-Follow enemy while auto attacking: What?


As far as I'm aware melee have to move around themselves to stay on an enemy, what if the whole process of positioning and movement was made easier for example.

06/16/2013 10:53 PMPosted by Secondwind
More utility: Nice to say. Harder to implement.


Not really. Look at gateway.

Tanks already have this as their niche. That's kind of their point. If I wanted to play a tank... I'D PLAY A TANK.


Tanks can have extra survivability. Melee should be more durable than casters as a general rule of thumb however, especially plate-wearers.

06/16/2013 11:16 PMPosted by Kitethis
Not every fight is a cleave fight, and the balance team shouldn't feel pressured to make every fight a cleave fight, just so melee won't get sat.


The balance team is already pressured on every fight to include stuff that makes certain roles feel...not left out.

Do you think they just throw bosses together?

For example, did you realize that lots of bosses in ToT have attacks that specifically prioritize hitting ranged targets?

We have powerful CD's. At the start of a fight, I can burst for 250k dps. When I get more gear it will be for a lot more. I have almost 100% crit chance, 20% crit damage, a DoT based on damage or 30% extra damage, combined with trinkets. My CD's are fine.


CD's more powerful than casters, and not just offensives either.

That would be either worthless or gamebreaking, and there's no middle ground there. Either healers notice it enough to stack melee on AoE fights, (or it disrupts PvP) or it's a boost, but it's still meh enough that healers work less and get more out of bringing more ranged.


You're exaggerating. There's a middle ground for everything, and they can sure as heck include mechanics that benefit having melee without removing ranged. It's already beneficial to stack certain classes as is and even high-end guilds try not to do that.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
4935
That would be a terrible nerf. On Horridon, I can lock down two poison priests myself with high mobility. I pummel the first, intervene to the tank who picks up the second where I cast disrupting shout, then leap back to my original target where I pummel again. You can't do that crap if you're fighting some buggy auto attack mechanic. It would strip melee of the only thing it is good at as of late.


Alright, fair enough. In my mind it really works as a sort of auto-pilot you can easily escape, maybe even a separate button that you can use to easily "lock" on a target but unlocks when you step a couple of yards away automatically.

Basically, something that makes it easier on you without impeding you, like mobile casting.

And in fact, if I totally didn't expect everybody to be satirical and insulting when asking a question, I would ask any melee who see this what improvement they woudl like that would drastically boost their QoL?

Like what? I mean really? Warriors and Pallies already bring some great CD's for utility. The point is, there are some mechanics you LITERALLY CANNOT DO WITHOUT RANGED, but no converse because minimum range requirements have been removed and ranged are more mobile. Making melee glorified buff bots like Vanilla Pallies won't make this better.

EDIT: Enh can bring heroism, which is the most important CD to a raid, bar none.
DK's / Feral Druids can bring B Rez, probably the second most important
Pallies Bring BoP and other neat Pally things I don't know about.
Warriors bring unique buffs: crit damage, 20% health to the raid.

The fact that melee already have access to great utility isn't helping, because... A: Ranged has the same utility, so they bring it along with the guarantee that there are no fights they'll be terrible at, if mobile. B: In the case of Warriors, I don't see it guaranteeing warriors any raid spots. So even giving us unique utility isn't cutting it in a world where DPS / Snap Mechanics are king.


I'm talking about special utility, like gateways. Stuff that, at the very least, makes current mechanics that make melee struggle a lot easier to bear.

That's why I suggested reduced damage as well, and I think melee should have a good number of gap closers that do not automatically need targets, so they can get around quicker (think of it as casters having overall mobility whereas melee would have burst mobility).

Keep them coming, and I can keep shooting them down. If it really were so easy, it would have been implemented already. Every one of your suggestions is shortsighted and missing the point.


Like immobile casting. You can shoot down any suggestion, but immobile casters are probably one of the absolute worst creations on the face of the earth.

You ranged want the entire game to change around you, because suddenly you want to get all the toys melee get, at a 40 yard range advantage. It really is that simple, and it's absurd.


Okay listen here you arrogant child, I don't know what your problem is, but I'm here trying to compromise. Stop smelling your own farts and maybe people will start to like you.

I also LOVE how you conveniently forget Hunters exist.

You had KJC for 2 tiers, you will be fine without it.

These threads are worse than when rogues lost cloak and dagger with dance.


It's not a question of fine, it's a question of necessity.
And it isn't necessary to nerf it.

The big issue is that KJC gave you mobility without a loss in potential damage. If you had to pay for being mobile by getting 5-10% of your damage lopped off every spell you do, would the mobility be worth it? That is what hunter's and shaman deal with. Both of those classes (spec for shaman) only do well in some fights this tier because their aoe carries them in places.


Yes. We've already received drastic nerfs to our abilities, nearly 25% across the board to most of our damage since KJC was implemented as it is.

We have been fine with the changes because the mobility made up for it and greatly increased the skill cap of playing the class.

I don't doubt that GC will make our damage normalized afterwards (eventually...), but the fact is that there's no reason that we should subscribe to his individual "vision" for the class when we know what we want, and are willing to sacrifice for it.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
4935
If you want KJC to remain how it is, then you have to give up being near the top of the damage meters and accept that the only time your class is going to rank very often is when demo can aoe alot of targets or something like that.


I'm fine with being lower on the charts, but the potential DPS of all "roles" should be the same.
The onyl difference is that mobile ranged are balanced around 100% up-time.

Hunters however, are badly balanced in PvE and even GC admits that, however he still defends their right to move while casting.

Overall, it's a risk I'm willing to take and, as seen by over 500 pages of complaints over the course of one weekend (when you combine US forums, EU forums, and other WoW fansite forums.), many others are too.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
6215
The biggest problem with the KJC nerf is not really how it will affect Warlocks performance. It is that the talent made Warlocks exponentially more fun without overpowering them (still in line with other pures in PvE and fairly middle of the pack in PvP).

The class can recover in other ways from the survivability and DPS nerf, but I'm shelving my Warlock because it's simply not fun to sit still and channel Malefic Grasp, or be unable to kite AOE groups without a well placed Demonic Circle in advance.

It's unfortunate given how well they revamped the class this expansion, but I know many Warlocks have said they feel the same.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Rogue
18260
These threads are worse than when rogues lost cloak and dagger with dance.


Cloak and Dagger is a useless talent with out it. (At least IMO and I don't even use it or play Sub)

But as to the OP, I don't think KJC should be as simple as it currently is. The 100% moving while casting for warlocks just seems too much. The CD doesn't seem right either, but my highest warlock was like 52 so what do I know.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Shaman
10110
Let warlocks keep KJC and nerf their damage across the board by 10-15%.

The problem with warlocks is that their complete package - mobility, damage, survivability and utility - is just too good.

If they keep all of their top end utility as well (ie. demonic gateway is unchanged), then I think that they should also nerf soul leech to the ground. A passive shield that literally lets you tank any damage is incredibly overpowered as well.
Reply Quote
90 Human Warrior
12020
Not really. Look at gateway.


Okay now come up with 1-3 new utility abilities for every melee spec in the game. They all must be unique, distinctive, and useful. Oh and take away the relevant utilities from Ranged, to make the "more utility" angle an actual Melee benefit.
Edited by Secondwind on 6/17/2013 8:16 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Priest
13355
Oh look a caster being mobile post from a warlock

/popcorn
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Warrior
15780
06/17/2013 06:40 AMPosted by Aerae
The biggest problem with the KJC nerf is not really how it will affect Warlocks performance. It is that the talent made Warlocks exponentially more fun without overpowering them (still in line with other pures in PvE and fairly middle of the pack in PvP).


It's kind of irrelevant if it made it more fun or not. It goes against the fundamental ideas of this game that casters have to stand still to cast.

It's the same reason people called foul on shuriken toss with rogues. Melee should have to be in melee range to deal the bulk of their damage.

It has nothing to do with raid encounters or how much damage is being dealt by warlocks. It's something that uproots the very foundation of the game and says, "Nah we're just going to forget that part".

Casters should be able to do some damage while moving. Ice Flows, Lighting Bolt, ect. are all good examples of some ranged damage on the move. It doesn't add up to a lot, but its not meant to.
Reply Quote
90 Worgen Rogue
18765
You're right!

Wouldn't it be a legs race?
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
14720
Survivability: Hah. You see how much casters are crying about losing their passive damage reductions? Now imagine that melee were given across the board a 10-15% damage reduction to make them more survivable. The QQ would be way worse.


Any competently played melee will have near 100% uptime on either Warlock, Shadow, or Balance.
Because of stuns and interrupts, it very difficult for any of these specs/classes to do effective damage while being tunnelled by said melee - thus the passive damage reduction to alleviate this somewhat.
I'm reasonably certain that Warriors, for instance or melee generally, don't have this concern thus your point seems odd.

In the end, for melee to function they need the ability to get into melee and stay there. Casters deal with casting mechanics and are less mobile to allow opportunities for that to happen


Conversely, casters need the ability to get away from melee and stay there to function.

In other words for WoW to be balanced, circles must be squared.

In the final analysis, I'm fine with casters being immobile - if I didn't I would have played a warlock for as long as I have - but the game could do with fewer gap closers and fewer melee interrupts.

Being tunnelled to death by melee, while not being able to cast effectively or get away reliably, is about as fun as a bout of nausea.
Edited by Zauberei on 6/17/2013 9:33 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
4935
But as to the OP, I don't think KJC should be as simple as it currently is. The 100% moving while casting for warlocks just seems too much. The CD doesn't seem right either, but my highest warlock was like 52 so what do I know.


Simple is the right way to go about it- didn't they say they want less button bloat and active abilities?

Let warlocks keep KJC and nerf their damage across the board by 10-15%.

The problem with warlocks is that their complete package - mobility, damage, survivability and utility - is just too good.

If they keep all of their top end utility as well (ie. demonic gateway is unchanged), then I think that they should also nerf soul leech to the ground. A passive shield that literally lets you tank any damage is incredibly overpowered as well.


I'd be fine with damage nerfs if that's what needed to put us in line and keep our mobility. I'm sure most Warlocks as well value being able to have fun with their class more than being able to turret out more damage while they're standing still.

Most people seem to imply I want Warlocks to be especially favored- I don't. I want us to be balanced, and I agree that we have a lot now. But taking away KJC is not the right thing to do in this circumstance.

Okay now come up with 1-3 new utility abilities for every melee spec in the game. They all must be unique, distinctive, and useful. Oh and take away the relevant utilities from Ranged, to make the "more utility" angle an actual Melee benefit.


You really think that both the game and the developers are as bland an unimaginative as you're implying?

06/17/2013 08:45 AMPosted by Curoar
It's kind of irrelevant if it made it more fun or not. It goes against the fundamental ideas of this game that casters have to stand still to cast.


It's not a fundamental idea, it's a silly notion with no actual reasoning behind it.
It's fundamentally worse than any other nice that I've described here, as movement is directly correlated to how fluid a class is played but is less so correlated to how much damage the class does.

It's the same reason people called foul on shuriken toss with rogues. Melee should have to be in melee range to deal the bulk of their damage.


I was under the impression that Shuriken Toss didn't do nearly the amount of damage a rogue could do in close proximity, but rather served as a way to handle ranged situations.

Regardless, why should we let archaic principles that have never been shown to aptly enhance the gameplay of everybody playing the game (point of a game) guide how the game is designed?

It has nothing to do with raid encounters or how much damage is being dealt by warlocks. It's something that uproots the very foundation of the game and says, "Nah we're just going to forget that part".


There are lots of things that are foundations of this game, but that isn't it. First, Hunters. Secondly, there is no drastic impact making casters more mobile would have on the game.

After all, for two tiers now we've had Warlocks and Hunters moving and casting. Has the game blown up? No. Has the Lock class become more fun? Yes. Does that mean the game is more fun for abandoning silly ideas that it never fully subscribed too regardless? Yes.

OK....hold on. Gonna put forth this response and I'll check it later after I get done with yard work. But I need some clarification on this. Are you saying, that being able to cast on the move, actually takes more skill than not being able to?

If that is the case, I have to ask what version of reality you live in. Under no circumstances does being able to cast on the move increase the skill of a player. With this mechanic you require no thought process to your actions, you just do.

You don't have to consider position at all. Is where I am a good spot? Will there be something here that will force me to move? Where can I move to when this next phase comes that will limit my movement and maximize my damage? None of these have to be considered.


When you're able to move and cast, a class is typically balanced around 100% up time. Also, it makes the class have to wholly focus on the rotation.

And as it stands, both Affliction and Destruction (the two specs hit hardest by the change) are exceptionally difficult at end-game raiding to master (exception is when Destro takes MF and essentially spams AoE because on Primordius you can't help but cap on Embers). Only one spec that I know of is more difficult than Destruction and maybe even Affliction, and that's Feral. Warlocks are easily the most difficult caster to master.
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]