World of Warcraft - English (NA) Forums -> Warlock PVP: What I don't want

Tiarnach

< Rule of Wrist >

Rexxar

40. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 11:50:48 AM PST

Q u o t e:
Thanks for the feedback. Good stuff.

In an ideal world, we don't want Demonology (or any spec for any class) to be THE PvP tree. This is tougher with the pure dps classes because any spec that sacrifices all for dps feels like a PvE spec and any spec that has survivability, crowd control or escape tools feels like a PvP spec. Long term though it is definitely a goal.

So I've been two-shotted by Ol' Crabby and I'm still downloading the patch! Seriously, two Warlock posts in one day that reflect an understanding of what we want--and just as importantly what we DON'T want??

Dude, seriously, I know it's not coffee in your morning mug, but whatever it is, this Warlock respectfully requests that you make the same thing the same way every morning from now until your overhaul of the Warlock Class is complete.

And if you read the threads, I'm sure you realize that I'm one of the locks first in line to clobber you the instant you say something we don't like. Thanks for being on the mark these last few go rounds.

Selenora

< Bambootown >

Burning Legion

41. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 11:51:23 AM PST

Q u o t e:
as you can see i play a Spriest
i agree with the OP 100%
and i would love to see the simular treatment for Spriests

Shadow solidarity!

Omg that felt lame typing that. But seriously, spriests are probably squishier than warlocks.

Priest community needs to make more of a fuss. ;)

Sorry to derail thread slightly.

But I do agree with the intent behind the OP's post.

The decision that needs to be made is whether warlocks actually need an entire class redesign.

And while some part of me believes the our current state (generally as it's related to PVP) requires such a heavy redesign, I would think we could test a number of oft-requested changes which might prevent the need for an entire class redesign.

Basic mechanic changes such as being able to use DC:T while stunned, making soul link trainable, removing the RNG from destruction, making shadowfury trainable (how about replace shadowflame with shadowfury as our lvl 75 talent, eh?).

I think some major spell/ability changes could be made without completely making over the class.

Hecubix

< Horde under one nati… >

Altar of Storms

42. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 12:04:25 PM PST

Q u o t e:

Range indicators (and a bit more range) would be quite nice for DT, but some of the others would possibly be troublesome. If the caster and portal switched, this would be nice for pvp, but troublesome in some pve cases where you use DT to avoid fall damage or get out of Maly's tornado thing. Similarly, being able to drop a new circle at will is useful. Maybe some of this could be solved via glyph.

Another random notion is to have the DC summon spell knockback or randomly teleport nearby melee. but this would require the spell to have a cooldown or reasonable cast-time.

The warlock/DC swap is pretty much just a random brain-fart I had, but you're right, it would reduce some of it's usefullness in PVE I suppose. On the other hand, it might make the spell feel a little less awkward in general, and that's primarily why I suggested it. The swapped locations would facilitate merging DT and DC and would make it feel more fluid if you wanted to use it everytime it was off cooldown.

Q u o t e:

Shadow solidarity!

Omg that felt lame typing that. But seriously, spriests are probably squishier than warlocks.

Priest community needs to make more of a fuss. ;)

Sorry to derail thread slightly.

Since warlocks and priests (especially spriests) have so much in common, I bet some of the general ideas to improve warlocks could also be applied to priests. Some of the things the OP suggested could certainly apply to priests as well.

[ Post edited by Hecubix ]

The problem with MMORPG's is that they put the RPG ahead of the MMO.

Elderan

Firetree

43. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 12:06:22 PM PST

Brilliant post, prett ymuch sums up alot of the defensive problems people have been mentioning for ages now.

I agree with everything here. Especially point 3. Before arenas we could PvP competitively with more than a Demo spec, that was brilliant and with more options IMO HEAPS more fun. There are alot of PvP talents in Destruction for example but it hasnt been viable in 5v5s...what a waste. That needs to change.

Cruce

< Eternal >

Scarlet Crusade

44. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 12:15:00 PM PST

Just a small thing I'd like to see is have DT give a much larger range, perhaps 100 yards. Might be a bit OP in places with flags to carry, but 40 just feels stifling. Also, it would be nice if it would teleport your pet with you.

Lastly, please please please give it a range indicator.

Rolling a gnome is like saying "I hate myself and I want you to hate me too."

Is your wit as sharp as your sword?
http://apirateiwasmeanttobe.ytmnd.com/

Abramelin

< Recently Deceased >

Skullcrusher

45. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 12:24:35 PM PST

Q u o t e:
try 2v2 with an spriest, it makes you really bitter.

Tried this last night - the only success we had was on teams w no healer, or where the healer was so bad that we could CC him the whole fight. Other than that, it was mostly dotting and running around trying to pick people against boxes, poles, etc.

Q u o t e:
Unless blizzard has some kind of unique damage mitigation or avoidance spells, I wouldn't mind pvp tanking like we used to. I don't want to be a shadow mage with version 0.1 of mage escape spells.

I agree with this - I was fine tanking in PvP when I had the survivability to do it. Hell, back in the day I had fun tanking in some of the easier instances at lvl 60 just for laughs.

[ Post edited by Abramelin ]

Badsha

Maelstrom

46. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 12:27:40 PM PST

I agree with everything he said. The immunities to fear just gota go, unless everyone gets the ability to be immune to stuns.

Im a demo lock so i dont mind it being the pvp spec. But as they stated "no one spec should be it. "

Soul LInk should make us even tougher... not just a tiny tiny bit longer lasting. Soul link no way can compete with burst now a days.

Good post.

Gerrick

< Neltharions Fury >

Kael'thas

47. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:02:15 PM PST

I think the only point that would be heavily debated by people will be #3, removing Soul Link. That is mainly because it is seen as such an essential talent. I personally agree with the OP, if a talent has become that essential to the class, then something isn't right. That kind of essential should only be for base abilities of the class, not talents.

But very well written OP.

Inverse

< Prophecy >

Darkspear

48. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:03:55 PM PST

Maybe I need to copy the format of this post to get some feedback read too?

What is it, shorter sentence format? :( Less explanation? I've made so many threads... I try so damn hard.

....meh, I can't give up. :( Not yet...

Harryhatchet

< Universal Soldiers >

Black Dragonflight

49. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:08:36 PM PST

Q u o t e:
There have been a lot of threads dedicated to warlocks and pvp mostly listing what warlocks think could improve their chances in pvp. Well, this is a thread about what I don't want. Agree or disagree - and share your own opinions.

(1) I don't want my defense to be tied to a talent. Making warlocks dependent on a particular talent for pvp will ensure that everyone takes the same cookie-cutter spec to survive. There is nothing fun about that. It also means that should we get attacked while not spec'd for that talent we have no chance.

(2) I don't want my defense to be tied to a pet. Pets should add flavor to our pvp style. We should not need a particular pet out to survive in pvp. When I'm spec'd chaos bolt I probably have a lot of talents invested in my imp. I don't want to need my succubus out to survive thereby wasting 6 to 8 talents points. I also really don't want a situation where the felhunter is good against casters, the voidwalker is good against melee, and the succubus is good against hybrids or whatever. Once a warlock pulls out a pet for a bg or arena, he/she really has no chance to get out another one (even with fel dom). I don't want to fight a melee with a VW and then turn around and be totally screwed against the mage heading my way because I don't have a felhunter out.

(3) I don't want soul link anymore. Soul link is a band-aid talent which is both a boon and a bane. Look, I'm glad we have something that helps a little (though not a lot). But, there are a few problems with soul link, though, that really needs to be addressed. The first is that every pvp build will assume the warlock has soul link and then build around it. Thus, a warlock can't survive w/o it. This, then, becomes a mandatory talent. Something I wanted to avoid (as stated in section 1). Second, it makes us too dependent on a pet to survive. If our pet dies, and if we're balanced on having soul link, then we're immediately undertuned as soon as it dies. And it will die. A pet with 8,500 health will be insta-gibbed by melee if they see it as a key to beating us. So get rid of soul link. It's been a decent band-aid but it's time to realize warlocks need more than a talent that makes us dependent on our pet.

(4) Don't make demonology the pvp tree. I realize this has long been the preferred method of fixing locks, but some of us like dots and some of us like chaos bolt. Don't make us give up our preferred playstyle to have a chance in pvp.

(5) Don't make us a one-trick pony. SL/SL was OP when paired with a druid. But we were basically a one-trick pony. That's not fun.

(6) Don't make our defense something that another class can trinket out of. This relates mostly to fear. When fear is trinketed out of, it's worthless for us. When it isn't, the one on the receiving end feels it's op. It also means that whether or not we live or die depends on whether or our opponent has his/her trinket up. I want something that affects me and gives me a defense - not another cc that is too easily countered.

TLDR Version: Our defense needs to be baseline (not a talent), not dependent upon a particular pet, and something that our opponent can't trinket out of.

Update: I knew I forgot something when I originally posted.

(7) Don't bother buffing Demon Armor. I still won't take it. PVP is about burst and I'm not about to give up all that spellpower for an extra 2000 armor that won't make a bit of difference.

I agree with all your points. Id like survival not to be tied to fear either . As you said its either OP or useless with no middle ground.

Bryonia

Aerie Peak

51. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:15:30 PM PST

Q u o t e:
Here's what to do:

A. Change Fear to last 5 seconds instead of 8

B. Remove the Hunter, Warrior, Druid, Death Knight fear immunities

C. Take Fear and Seduce off of the same DR

Now, we are guaranteed at least one fear per matchup. Fixed

They won't.

Dear Blizzard, We seem to have a failure to communicate. I said my class needed to be fixed, and you scheduled a veterinarian appointment for me.

Syngd

< Drifter >

Arthas

52. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:18:06 PM PST

Q u o t e:
Here's what to do:

A. Change Fear to last 5 seconds instead of 8

B. Remove the Hunter, Warrior, Druid, Death Knight fear immunities

C. Take Fear and Seduce off of the same DR

Now, we are guaranteed at least one fear per matchup. Fixed

Wouldn't do anything to help against rogues which is by far our worst class

Can't do that while stunned.

Can't do that while stunned.

Can't do that while stunned.

Osgiliath

Arathor

54. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:24:50 PM PST

in before not a deli

Doomrograx

< AfterLife >

Korgath

55. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 01:43:04 PM PST

Q u o t e:

(2) I don't want my defense to be tied to a pet. Pets should add flavor to our pvp style. We should not need a particular pet out to survive in pvp. When I'm spec'd chaos bolt I probably have a lot of talents invested in my imp. I don't want to need my succubus out to survive thereby wasting 6 to 8 talents points. I also really don't want a situation where the felhunter is good against casters, the voidwalker is good against melee, and the succubus is good against hybrids or whatever. Once a warlock pulls out a pet for a bg or arena, he/she really has no chance to get out another one (even with fel dom). I don't want to fight a melee with a VW and then turn around and be totally screwed against the mage heading my way because I don't have a felhunter out.

Not to steal the thunder from focus on warlocks but they should take this into account for both pet classes(ie. hunters and warlocks). You shouldn't be pigeonholed into using a particular pet and in our case pet spec to be viable. And both classes should have baseline defense instead of pet dependent defense unless they plan on implementing more buffs to pet hp and shared resil.

[ Post edited by Doomrograx ]

http://www.AfterLifeTheresDeath.com

Ragingclue

< Still Life >

Kilrogg

56. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 02:12:15 PM PST

Can't do that while stunned.

But homophobia remains the one form of bigotry that respectable people can express in public.

-Michael Bailey, NY Times 12/1991

Speshal

The Forgotten Coast

58. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 02:40:10 PM PST

You realize all these things could be achieved with just a few changes that wouldn' t impact the all-mighty PvE balance. Here are just a few ideas (obviously not all are required)

1. Add cripple to warlock in some form
2. Make Soul Link trainable
3. Tweak Demonic Circle (remove stuns)
4. Tweak Shadowflame (either knock back or something to make it it useful)
5. Self banish (an immunity ability is needed by ALL classes now)

Ghostcrawler

Blizzard Poster

59. Re: Warlock PVP: What I don't want 12/22/2008 02:41:49 PM PST

Q u o t e:
Honestly GC with the changes you have made to destruction I think all 3 trees could effectively serve as a PVP tree so long as the fixes that you give for warlock survivability are core abilities and not talents. You have really done wonders towards making destruction viable for PVP and for that I thank you. Please keep in mind when developing the warlock fixes that making them talents will only take away from what you have already done :D

I agree with that. Destruction is in a better place (compared to how it used to be vs. Demonology).

Q u o t e:
Does Blizzard plan to make a pet choice more varying in arena? Right now you always see one type of pet, but do you plan to make each have a specific goal?

That is the goal. I think we've done better at Affliction wanting the felhunter, Destruction wanting the imp and Demonology wanting the felguard, at least in PvE. We would like to get the succubus and voidwalker into Arenas more. We have some ideas....

On fear....

We still like the change to how fear works overall. Because it can be broken it's less of a long-term CC, but it's also more consistent in the short-term.

However, I think a lot of the consternation about warlock PvP comes from losing fear as an amazing source of CC (probably replaced by stuns now which probably isn't a good thing), coupled with losing some of the "tankiness" locks had before, but without giving you all of the get out of jail cards that a mage has.

Ultimately I think we actually do want locks to survive through mitigation (when compared to survival through CC or escape mechanisms). The trick is nailing this compromise between plate-wearers who stand and take it and glass cannons who run away. There is probably something to the fact that locks and hunters both feel like they can't stand and fight and can't get away from melee. It's the mail-wearer paradox. I know you don't wear mail per se, but we're pushing you closer to that than we are the slippery mage.

Forum > CLASS ROLES > DAMAGE DEALING