#293 - Aug. 19, 2014, 4:18 a.m.
Hey DKs. I've responded to a lot of DK questions on Twitter, but finally am getting time to pop in here to the forums and respond on the forums. Frost in particular has has gotten some significant changes, and frustration from that is totally understandable.
-Why is Critical Strike deprecated by (at last calculation) around 20% for Frost DKs? In an expansion with bonus loot and no more reforging, it would seem that we are much more at the mercy of RNG when it comes to loot pieces.
While I am aware that we have some flexibility in the form of enchants and some consumables, is this deprecation really necessary in the first place?
-Continuing on the theme of stat valuation, Mastery's valuation for 2h Frost has also proven to be pitifully low in our early simulations.
Loot changes actually have very little impact on this. However, we do want secondary stats to be close in value, and these are just a tuning issues that we want to improve upon. Please post your theorycrafting results over in the Class Design Theorycraft Results thread.
-Necrotic Plague is currently simming at a DPS loss for multiple DPS specs. Other Level-100 talents also show a very minimal gain. We realise that there is probably room for significant improvement in how we're coding them, but these results also appear to be reflected in actual tests.
Could you please tell us if there is a margin of gain which we should expect (both ST and multi target) with these talents? I'd particularly appreciate if you could comment on Festerblight and Unholy Death Knights.
I'd hope it'd be obvious that in a row of throughput talents, one that reduces your throughput is not intended. Yes, we'll tune the whole row to be a significant but not huge damage gain. Something similar in power to most of our other throughput increasing talent rows.
-Could you please comment on Unholy AoE and Frost Runes? As mentioned earlier in this thread, it is incredibly frustrating to transition in and out of AoE/Single-target priorities due to Frost Runes doing nothing for Unholy AoE. I realise that you intend for pre-planning to be reward, but the reality of the situation translates very differently in raid situations where we switch priorities frequently. It also pushes us quite strongly towards the Blood Tap talent.
We see it as a minor annoyance. We haven't found a solution that we're happy with that doesn't have negatives that outweigh the positives. Ideas are welcome, though the problem isn't impactful enough to warrant a mechanic change at this point for 6.0. It's something we'd be interested in addressing in a future patch.
-Speaking of Blood Tap, there seems to be little to no reason for Unholy DKs to take Runic Empowerment thanks to the way in which it interacts with our Rune setup. Other specs are not much better, as they have to game it to get the most out of it. This talent has proven unpopular for a reason, not the least of which is that macroed Blood Tap can mimic its functionality, but provide even greater flexibility due to it generating Death Runes.
This is another case where what is there works, and we think we could do better, we just are still trying to find the right solution. I'd say that the goal we're looking for is to make the payoff of Runic Empowerment stronger (perhaps just a numbers tweak would work here), and to make Blood Tap not macroable (but just putting it on the GCD has some significant downsides).
-Runic Power generation for Blood Death Knights feels quite spiky. With Necrotic Plague for instance, it becomes overwhelming in any sort of AoE tanking situation- making the talent feel quite mandatory. With high levels of Multistrike, we appear to go from 0 to 50 Runic Power in barely a global. Is there no way to standardise the generation so that it doesn't feel quite as "Feast and Famine"-esque?
Indeed it does. Currently, the issue is that we need to get X total RP out of Y multistrike, and so the tuning is as such. However, that makes it spiky. You could argue that that's OK, since you can spend it in big chunks, and the defensive value of it is heavily smoothed. Because of that, we're tentatively OK with it for now, but would be interested in iterating on it in the future.
In closing, similar to what I've said to a few other classes tonight, I'd like to discuss this further with you all, but please make that easy for me to do, by keeping the hyperbole and anger and useless sarcasm and generally destructive behavior out of this. Thanks.