AP Scaling and other DPS changes to the Warrior going up to PTS

[Hunt55511]

Which might matter if there were really any fights with more than 5 enemies...

Matron, Akylios, looks like the first ID boss will be considering the giant-*** group around him...
Still, doesn't matter.

[batou079]

Sorry to dig up this post. Kokie from Voodoo is claiming that Warriors are doing 5k+ raid buffed parses. Voodoo warriors are (obviously) very good but you guys are no slouches either when it comes to DPS. Based on the builds on PTS now, is that possible?

This is the parse which we have been using for comparison - http://i.imgur.com/9h0sD.png
51 CH / 15 RB Breakdown - http://i.imgur.com/oT208.png

It is 100% using Infernal Dawn gear. There was some drama between the ID test guilds, because someone kept claiming PTS parses were with current LIVE Gear, when in fact he was lying and it was ID gear. He got called out by another ID test guild member... These were the outlying DPS parses you saw at 5k+ that Atrius was curious about. Bogus testing #s for the same of PTS tests.

Anyway, i'm also confused by Atrius latest change. I TOTALLY understand that he wants to keep all DPS builds on an even kilter, but what i don't understand is reducing both the amount of soul synergy we have and reducing our off GCD finisher choices at the same time. This game was supposed to be about soul flexibility and choices... but our flexibility just shrank, losing 600ish DPS on a DPS build isn't a "slight balance" it is a flat nerf, let's not sugar coat that fact.

If he were to keep Icy Assault on GCD, but revert the Destroyers change it would still be a nerf, but not nearly as devastating as it is now. And ultimately, if he truely means to buff warrior DPS souls across the board once they are balanced with each other, this would ensure that 51 Champion based builds do not fall behind. Atrius, i beg you to re-examine a reduction of soul synergy.

I do not speak for the warrior community, but i guarantee our biggest concern right now is the loss of soul synergy (flexibility) that attracted most of us to this game... Not so much the dps loss, as you say you will be buffing us back up.

[Drathek]

I'd say there's a big difference in aoe capability comparing paragon to champ. Even 100% crit poth's only hit once every 6s. Compare that to mb every gcd and blade fury every finisher. Its a sizeable difference even considering paragon getting more range and more targets by a little.

Its almost ok if u use para champ and weaponswap for mb then swap back for poth, but is a lot clunkier then 51 champs aoe rotation. (Assuming in para champ u have talented follow thru for more targets hit, and use an oilstone as well)

[PFalcon]

I'd say there's a big difference in aoe capability comparing paragon to champ. Even 100% crit poth's only hit once every 6s. Compare that to mb every gcd and blade fury every finisher. Its a sizeable difference even considering paragon getting more range and more targets by a little.

Its almost ok if u use para champ and weaponswap for mb then swap back for poth, but is a lot clunkier then 51 champs aoe rotation. (Assuming in para champ u have talented follow thru for more targets hit, and use an oilstone as well)

You still can make the argument that paragon's AoE is fine because of the nature of it. Like I said, I got it up to 3600/s on the trio dummies with those critting hurricanes. Had I added the whole row of dummies that the champ can't hit....

Paragon's AoE can't be beaten by a champ unless everything's packed in there. That's why it's perfectly fine being significantly lower in melee AoE quarters.

I'm using the argument of why ranged DPS should be lower than melee dps, on myself. Paragon can reach mobs in AoE that champ can't. So yeah it has to pay.

[Undrsiege]

It is 100% using Infernal Dawn gear. There was some drama between the ID test guilds, because someone kept claiming PTS parses were with current LIVE Gear, when in fact he was lying and it was ID gear. He got called out by another ID test guild member... These were the outlying DPS parses you saw at 5k+ that Atrius was curious about. Bogus testing #s for the same of PTS tests.

Anyway, i'm also confused by Atrius latest change. I TOTALLY understand that he wants to keep all DPS builds on an even kilter, but what i don't understand is reducing both the amount of soul synergy we have and reducing our off GCD finisher choices at the same time. This game was supposed to be about soul flexibility and choices... but our flexibility just shrank, losing 600ish DPS on a DPS build isn't a "slight balance" it is a flat nerf, let's not sugar coat that fact.

If he were to keep Icy Assault on GCD, but revert the Destroyers change it would still be a nerf, but not nearly as devastating as it is now. And ultimately, if he truely means to buff warrior DPS souls across the board once they are balanced with each other, this would ensure that 51 Champion based builds do not fall behind. Atrius, i beg you to re-examine a reduction of soul synergy.

I do not speak for the warrior community, but i guarantee our biggest concern right now is the loss of soul synergy (flexibility) that attracted most of us to this game... Not so much the dps loss, as you say you will be buffing us back up.

Like I discussed with you in another thread they would have to separate physical and elemental damage more than it already was to be able to balance pvp.. You can not have all souls running so close dps on dummies and then expect the same damage to translate to pvp the exact same as physical would be reduced by another 30%+ while the elemental would not. Take it how you will I expected this and maybe this saves the RB soul wide nerf in PvP.

[Sebb]

Like I discussed with you in another thread they would have to separate physical and elemental damage more than it already was to be able to balance pvp.. You can not have all souls running so close dps on dummies and then expect the same damage to translate to pvp the exact same as physical would be reduced by another 30%+ while the elemental would not. Take it how you will I expected this and maybe this saves the RB soul wide nerf in PvP.

You start by balancing stuff on the dummy, then you reduce the effectiveness in pvp - not the other way around.

I don't see NB being 30% less effective for rogues.

[Methadras]

Why am i getting the sense that some abilities are being nerfed, while others are being uplifted, but yet the outcome still remains the same, while giving the impression that 'something' is being done? Just an observation.

[Durango]

Agreed. Idc if para is 100 Dps more st than a 2h build, but I want a competitive st 2h build so I don't waste my time rolling against rogues and warriors for 1h. I do want to see parses after this nerf to judge where all specs are at, however, we are getting close to 1.8. Between this nerf,
waiting for parses, the next "buff, waiting for parses, then the next inevitable nerf to that buff, I feel like we will either run out of time, or raid with a spec slapped together an hour before.

Would probably make sense to have:

Champ: Top AoE, 60-70% ST
Para: 100% ST + decent ranged (60-70%) for discos, meh AoE (~40%)
RB: 95-100% ST + 60-70% AoE
BM: (80-90%) ST + (80-90%) AoE, +~3-5% multiplicative raid wide damage buff.

That would give warriors both a DW + 2H high ST spec both with distinct advantages. A heavy AoE spec, plus a good versatile/raid needed spec. Mix and match between trees somewhat as required.

[Undrsiege]

You start by balancing stuff on the dummy, then you reduce the effectiveness in pvp - not the other way around.

I don't see NB being 30% less effective for rogues.

I thought it was very comical an almost pure physical soul was getting the most dps from 15 pts in another tree that was not even physical, and do not call it synergy call it broken and now fixed.

[PFalcon]

Oh does anyone know what the deal with the warlord spotter's order description is about?
Each attacker may trigger it once every 3 seconds, lasts 20 seconds....

?

Does that mean any warrior who uses it stacks a damage boost per hit on the mob for 20 seconds?

If that's the case, synergy over. everyone go 2 warlord.

[Sebb]

Would probably make sense to have:

Champ: Top AoE, 60-70% ST
Para: 100% ST + decent ranged (60-70%) for discos, meh AoE (~40%)
RB: 95-100% ST + 60-70% AoE
BM: (80-90%) ST + (80-90%) AoE, +~3-5% multiplicative raid wide damage buff.

That would give warriors both a DW + 2H high ST spec both with distinct advantages. A heavy AoE spec, plus a good versatile/raid needed spec. Mix and match between trees somewhat as required.

No. Honestly we don't have enough souls to be dividing up that way. We've got three non pet souls only. They need to do comparable st dps.

It should be (IMO)

Champ. 100% st, worst for disconnects, best AOE.
RB: 100% st, good for short disconnects only. 70% best AOE
Para : 100% st, best disconnects (remove range penalty and potw cd), bad AOE
BM: 100% st, 80% AOE, good mobility

[Kwerd]

the problem with 51champ/15 rb was probably not the dps. The dps seemed okay. At least from my testing. The problem with it was the concept. 51champ is a physical brute damaging soul. The concept of having a large chunk of your damage be based on elemental damage was probably the reason they rejected it......

lol i don't think trion cares that much about concept... how long has our top 2her spec been using 38 pts into a DW soul?

[Blackblade]

Oh does anyone know what the deal with the warlord spotter's order description is about?
Each attacker may trigger it once every 3 seconds, lasts 20 seconds....

?

Does that mean any warrior who uses it stacks a damage boost per hit on the mob for 20 seconds?

If that's the case, synergy over. everyone go 2 warlord.

Ermmm....you do know that spotter's get overwritten by another spotter's right?

[Kwerd]

btw, wtb a dps soul with 1 second global cooldown. Mages have one, why can't we?

[Rudolf]

No. Honestly we don't have enough souls to be dividing up that way. We've got three non pet souls only. They need to do comparable st dps.

It should be (IMO)

Champ. 100% st, worst for disconnects, best AOE.
RB: 100% st, good for short disconnects only. 70% best AOE
Para : 100% st, best disconnects (remove range penalty and potw cd), bad AOE
BM: 100% st, 80% AOE, good mobility

Agree with you, DW is not the reason to be only best ST dps, all 4 souls should stay at the same level.

We only have 4 dps souls, which is the same as cleric and much less than other 2 classes.

And dont forget that it is hard to combine BM with 3 other 51 souls since you need 21 points to get your level 50 pets.