Is Inner Beast Duration To Short ? Vote

[Kitru]

1. WAR comes in Dead last in having Off-GCD attacks (Next to WHM).

Which has absolutely nothing to do with what is being discussed. It doesn't matter how many off-GCD attacks a class has because off-GCD attacks are not the entirety of a class's performance. WAR manages virtually all of its damage without any off-GCD attacks. PLD gets slightly more than 1/6th of its damage from off-GCD attacks. It doesn't make PLD better than WAR; in fact, WAR still does more damage than PLD even though PLD has more off-GCD attacks that also happen to deal more damage than the one off-GCD attack that WAR has (250 and ~300 potency each).

Also, you're forgetting BLM, which has *no* attacks that are off of the GCD. Depending upon how you intepret Bane, SCH is tied with WAR at only having 1.

2. To even get stacks to use Inner beast, you have to be in Defiance in the first place. This factor alone destroys any hope Warriors had of being a great DPS Tank

Except that WAR *already* has very impressive damage. It doesn't need to approach the DPS of a true DPS in order to have DPS that is too high for its given role. WAR is already breaching that point if you're playing it properly. I often do upwards of 60-75% of a DPS's damage as a WAR, which, given that a tank is supposed to deal roughly 50% of the damage of a DPS, is outrageously high. WAR damage doesn't *need* to be buffed. Hell, it *shouldn't* be buffed at all because it's plenty high.

Your response Sounds like a knee jerk response,which is strickly your opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I dont think anyone likes your idea and doesnt want to see Inner Beast Nerfed to 150 Potency. It is our signature move and should be strong.

Except it's not being nerfed. You assume that it's being nerfed because you're oblivious enough to think that any reduction in potency is a nerf. The only change that my suggestion (which, keep in mind, I'm don't even think is needed; I'm perfectly happy with IB being on the GCD and only wish it last an extra 1-2 seconds) would cause is taking it off of the GCD. The average damage would remain exactly the same.

If IB were *not* reduced in potency while being taken off the GCD, you're increasing average potency per GCD. There's absolutely no question about that.

As to it being a knee-jerk response that no one else agrees with, if you go back and actually read the discussion instead of skimming it, ignoring it, or only reading the last 2 comments before you post, you'll see that several other people shared the same concern when the idea of it being taken off-GCD was brought up and that I actually did the math to explain how it could be taken off GCD without affecting average potency per GCD appreciably. I actually put forth thought concerning my answer and made sure it was consistent with existing balance concerns and accounted for the consequences of changing it.

It wasn't knee jerk and there are plenty of people that agree with me. The fact that you're oblivious to that just cements my opinion that you've got no idea what balance actually is. You honestly believed that reducing the potency to 150 while taking it off of the GCD would cause people to use Steel Cyclone instead. That's enough of a demonstration of your lack of understanding about the subject.

P.S. Your spelling is terrible. They're spelled "mathematically" and "strictly". Most browsers have integrated spellcheckers that I suggest you use.

[OmegaSinX]

As to it being a knee-jerk response that no one else agrees with, if you go back and actually read the discussion instead of skimming it, ignoring it.

It's funny you accuse me of not reading/ignoring your comments and turn around and do the same thing yourself. If you read my comment you would see that I didnt disagree with your point that it will increase WAR damage during that GCD and the point I was trying to make is that Good players use Inner Beast for its DR so its not like were going to spam it to incease DPS. And regardless if it increase WAR's damage per GCD, it still wouldnt be enough to make WAR OP like you were implying. And your belief of that tank DPS is suppose to do less than 50% of true DPS is just another opinion. When I use to play WoW, I was almost always TOP DPS as a Warrior Tank.

P.S. Your spelling is terrible. They're spelled "mathematically" and "strictly". Most browsers have integrated spellcheckers that I suggest you use.

Typical Kitru LMAO. Attacking anyone who doesnt agree with her/him. I could have said 99.9% facts and you would still have a snarky counter attack as long as I disagree. Spell checking people on the internet. smh. Someone give this guy a medal.

Im sorry, I thought I was making a entry on a forum, not writing a critically acclaimed novel. I'll make sure to hire a editor ASAP.

[Kitru]

And regardless if it increase WAR's damage per GCD, it still wouldnt be enough to make WAR OP like you were implying. And your belief of that tank DPS is suppose to do less than 50% of true DPS is just another opinion.

What you're forgetting is that the desired effect was to take IB off of the GCD without impacting anything else (since there was no argument to improve any other value concerning WAR). Simply taking it off of the GCD would increase DPS while simultaneously allowing it to be used off GCD. Changing that single aspect of the ability impacts multiple end values. If all you wanted was to have the ability to use IB as a mitigation and self-healing mechanism off-GCD (which is what is desires), the damage would need to be reduced in order to prevent it from acting as a damage increase as well.

It's not question of WAR becoming OP with the change but rather whether an increase in damage is justifiable. WAR already deals substantially more damage than a PLD while tanking so it makes next to no sense to further increase WAR damage when there is a very easily implemented way to take IB off of the GCD while minimizing collateral effects.

You're the one that believed that the damage should remain the same because otherwise people would use Steel Cyclone while also stating that any reduction in the damage would act as a nerf even if the damage per GCD remained exactly the same. Neither of those is true. What you're arguing for is the removal of Inner Beast from the GCD while also increasing the WAR's damage, which is perfectly fine to argue, but, by doing that, you're arguing that WAR damage is too low and needs to be increased.

The entire point of the reduction in potency and increase in percent-of-damage-as-healing was to preserve the current level of performance while providing the desired modification in usability. Simply taking it off of the GCD changes performance (increasing damage, burst damage, and potential use rate) on top of modifying usability. You're ignoring everything else that the change would create out of arbitrary obtuseness.

What's funny about this is that you're accusing me of having a knee jerk reaction when I've actually thought about the results of what such a change would do more than you have, as evidenced by your continual ignorance about the effects as well as jumping to completely inaccurate conclusions.

When I use to play WoW, I was almost always TOP DPS as a Warrior Tank.

If you were top DPS as a Warrior tank in WoW, you were either throwing out AoE damage while the DPS was doing ST, which is just padding your numbers and therefore moot, or you ran with *really* bad DPS. Tanks have always done substantially less damage than DPS with the standard convention being roughly 50% (such that 2 tanks, 4 DPS, 2 healers translates into ~5 DPS), which is why tanks have always had outrageous threat modifiers (which WoW has continually increased in size because DPS growth always manages to outstrip threat growth). If a tank ever dealt as much damage as a DPS, it would be broken as hell because tanks built to be as durable as possible; that's the trade off: higher survivability means you have lower damage. When tanks are competing with DPS on numbers, there isn't much reason to bring DPS.

[OmegaSinX]

I often do upwards of 60-75% of a DPS's damage as a WAR, which, given that a tank is supposed to deal roughly 50% of the damage of a DPS, is outrageously high. WAR damage doesn't *need* to be buffed. Hell, it *shouldn't* be buffed at all because it's plenty high.

I would agree with you if the average Warrior Did 60-75% DPS of a Pure DPS . But you are fully Spec STR with Pure STR DPS Accessories (Striking & Maiming) which is only ideal in content that you are over geared for. Realistically the average War DPS is about 50% of pure DPS while in Defiance (without sacraficing alot of VIT and Parry for STR build like yours). Also, I think its kinda contradicting of you to say that WAR DPS is OP and should not be buffed but then intentionally try to max your WAR DPS.

In realistic/practical use, it'll probably be less then a fractures use however. If a Warriors is OTing, they should be dropping Defiance to increase DPS, which makes IB oGCD moot. If they are MTing, they should be using for spike damage as its designed, which having it oGCD will effectively do nothing but quality of life while we continue our normal rotations instead of sitting on our thumbs.

Traek captured my point exactly . No one is saying it wouldnt increase WAR DPS per GCD . But my point is the suggested change to Inner Beast was aimed more to be a QoL change . If a WAR really wants to push DPS, he will drop defiance all together. I believe there are alot things to consider that will keep Warrior DPS in check compared to a pure DPS (-25% Damage penalty in Defiance, WAR primary stat compared to DPS, Most tank gear dont have DPS stats on them, Inner Beast should be used to mitigate damage > DPS, etc)

[Kitru]

I would agree with you if the average Warrior Did 60-75% DPS of a Pure DPS . But you are fully Spec STR with Pure STR DPS Accessories (Striking & Maiming) which is only ideal in content that you are over geared for. Realistically the average War DPS is about 50% of pure DPS while in Defiance (without sacraficing alot of VIT and Parry for STR build like yours).

Except that I have all of my points in VIT and only hit the 75% mark when using full DPS accs (and, even then, not crafted ones; just the offspec ones I've gotten from raiding). I regularly manage 60-65% of a DPS while in full tank gear.

Also, I think its kinda contradicting of you to say that WAR DPS is OP and should not be buffed but then intentionally try to max your WAR DPS.

No, contradicting myself would be saying WAR DPS is OP and then further suggesting that WAR DPS be buffed. Balance and optimization are completely different constructs. Balance is a development concept whereas optimization is a player concept (though, keep in mind, optimization must be kept in mind for balance). I maximize my DPS while maximizing my survivability because that's the way to make myself as effective of a tank as possible. The only way that it has anything to do with balance is the relative performance between my optimized performance and those of other classes, which serves as a gauge to ascertain whether WAR needs to be changed.

But my point is the suggested change to Inner Beast was aimed more to be a QoL change . If a WAR really wants to push DPS, he will drop defiance all together.

Then why does Inner Beast deal any damage at all? Damage might not be the primary goal of a tank, but it's still a consideration. It's not a question of whether a WAR wants to push and maximize current DPS but whether it increases DPS while the WAR is tanking. Taking it off the GCD while keeping the damage as is would increase DPS while tanking any time that you were tanking. It doesn't matter if a WAR could turn off Defiance to do more damage because I'm not talking about a WAR dropping Defiance to max damage. I'm talking about the increase to damage that a WAR *not* trying to maximize damage would get because your change increases damage along with the usability of IB.

Your entire problem is that you seem to care more about keeping IB the same while only changing one aspect of it instead of trying to maintain the performance of the class as a whole while only changing how one ability is used. Simply taking IB off of the GCD without changing its damage increases WAR damage. It doesn't matter if you think that it's a small change or not because it's an increase to damage no matter what. Reducing the damage by half and doubling the self heal keeps the damage and self-heal almost exactly the same while having the same QoL improvement.

As an example, imagine putting Brutal Swing onto the GCD. It's only 50 potency, which is horrible for an on-GCD ability, even if it's a stun. It make up for the decreased value of it being an on-GCD attack, its damage would need to be increased to maintain the current level of performance (which provides an extra 6.25 potency per GCD). The exact same process is true when discussing taking IB off of the GCD: its damage needs to be lowered to maintain the current level of performance. The only reason *not* to change the damage/self-healing would be if you believe that WAR needs more damage.