Paladin Weapon spec talents working?
- Thread starter TheFishyOne
- Start date
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
and how would you explain the Wotlk patch note written then ?
http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/game/patch-notes/3-0-2
One-Handed Weapon Specialization now increases damage by 2/4/6/8/10%.
Does that mean this is correct and "should not work with all damage during WotLK" ?!.
Your Logic............
How come then after the 3.0.2 "Wotlk Patchnote mention above" it is 3 Ranks and work with All Abilities instead Patchnote explained !?.....
I guess he won't listen (read, whatever), pointless to keep arguing.
I will humiliate all the arguments which are not making any sense and here is pure example with 3.0.1 Patch Note.
Last edited:
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
Also lol'd when i found this : http://forum.twinstar.cz/showthread.php/96252-Tanking?p=788605&viewfull=1#post788605
Psojed
- many people think 1H Specialization it just boosts your white 1h weapon damage by 10%, but in fact you deal more damage with anything you use while wearing a 1-handed weapon. That includes Consecration, Exorcism, etc. More holy damage = more threat obviously. The same mechanism is true for 2H Specialization. I haven't tried if it works properly tho.
Psojed
- many people think 1H Specialization it just boosts your white 1h weapon damage by 10%, but in fact you deal more damage with anything you use while wearing a 1-handed weapon. That includes Consecration, Exorcism, etc. More holy damage = more threat obviously. The same mechanism is true for 2H Specialization. I haven't tried if it works properly tho.
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
But it doesn't say "All Damage" tho ... right. (and still work with all damage) .
Psojed
Authorized
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
I guess he won't listen (read, whatever :laugh, pointless to keep arguing.
He does listen, but you have to reply with a long explanatory post.
@killerduki: the link for twinhead shows the effect of the spell. The effect we are looking for is "Apply Aura: Mod Dmg % (All)", as it is named by thottbot. In mangos core language, "127" is used by core to describe "all" possible options. Simply said, if the spell used to boost all damage in vanilla, opening the spell on any database (vanilla, tbc, wotlk) will produce the same effect. The effect can also be found on old websites such as allakhazam or thottbot themselves under the spell description. By showing you the effect on twinhead database I displayed, that the effect was not the same.
The WotLK patch note only states that the percentage changed, it does not say anything about the effect of the spell. This can be confirmed by the abovementioned method:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080208114505/http://thottbot.com/s20200
https://web.archive.org/web/20081212082734/http://thottbot.com/s20200
You can see the effect remained identical, only the value changed to 10%.
However, the 2.1.0 patch note includes information that the effect of the spell has changed.
As for your comment ..
..of course it doesn't say in the patch note, because it already says so in the wotlk spell description.
---
Now back to vanilla stuff.
The links you posted:
1) http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/One-Handed_Weapon_Specialization?direction=next&oldid=136395
does not specify if it's all damage or just weapon damage either, it only says that it works identical to Warrior talent. In Vanilla, Warrior talent increases physical damage dealt, therefore if it works identical, paladin's talent would also boost only physical damage.
2) http://web.archive.org/web/20061110...rcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11931828&sid=1
The fact that moderator stickied a post on a forum means that the post is useful, not that it is 100% correct. The post itself is named "revised" which suggests that its contents were changed at least once. As far as I am concerned, the post has as much informational value as a wowwiki entry has.
On a side note, there's some nonsense in that guide too, for example the guide states that paladins have an intel-to-crit ratio of 28.5.
Secondly, the archived post is from November 2006, which is after BC was available for beta testing. The very first post of the guide:
So we can safely assume that the guide was posted 25th September 2006, and after that the author went to play BC and then edited the guide.
Third, the guide does not state any source, no screenshot or video how it was tested. Since no other Paladin guides mention that 1H weapon specialization boosts all damage of a paladin, this doesn't help at all.
In other words, the posted proofs do not prove anything.
I also watched some old paladin videos in search for a definite proof. "Tanking before it was cool" has barely readable numbers, but it doesn't help either, because we don't know the amount of spell damage involved, therefore we can't discern if talent had an effect on holy damage or not.
Most PvP videos are useless in that manner too, because ret and holy paladins do not have the talent, and even if they had, the possible damage ranges of seals and judgements are too big so that they cover the % difference that might be caused by the talent.
Orrim's PvP video includes a levelling part from patch 1.8, where Blessing of Sanctuary is used and procs regularly. However, the spell is reactive, therefore it might not be affected by stuff like Sanctity aura or Vengeance, which also means it might not be affected by 1H weapon spec either.
I don't know why would you "lol" when my statement supports your claim. Guess you're an *****. Anyway, I do believe that 1h weapon spec boosted all damage even prior to BC. Checking archive of allakhazam shows that the talent used to give 5% only, then at some point it suddenly gave 10%, then BC patch said it gave only 5% again. The first change from 5 to 10 is not even documented in the patch notes, it could have been during the pally revamp or at some different point, I don't know.
But just believing isn't enough, you have to bring solid proof to the devs before they make a change.
The only way you can check if the talent boosted holy damage or not is by using a screenshot or video, where we see a holy spell with precise damage (consecration) and where we know the user's talents (so that he actually uses it), and finally we know his equipment and buffs, to check his spell damage amount, then do the math.
The only humiliating thing here is your bad english and typing :wink:
Horo
Authorized
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Location
- Deutschland
This is only an anecdote, but I'm certain that 1HWS only effected auto attacks in 1.12.1.
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
The WotLK patch note only states that the percentage changed, it does not say anything about the effect of the spell. This can be confirmed by the abovementioned method:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080208...bot.com/s20200
Apply Aura: Mod Dmg % (All)
Value: 5
https://web.archive.org/web/20081212...bot.com/s20200
Apply Aura: Mod Dmg % (All)
Value: 10
You can see the effect remained identical, only the value changed to 10%.
Still yet you link wotlk and tbc but not vanilla mod auras to confirm your claim , mangos maybe have bug issue, but nothing with "vanilla version" unless evidence .
it might be still the description unless proven with "Vanilla version" same way as you posted tbc and wotlk but not vanilla , and this is what i say , mangos did not got those information yet properly due to 'non existant' vanilla and switched to "physical" because of "patch and spell description" instead mod aura from thottbot and alklazam .
Psojed
Authorized
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
I don't use any tbc or wotlk links to confirm my claims. And I don't link a vanilla version, since there is none in the archive. I only linked the higher patch stuff, because you started linking some wotlk patch notes, however those wotlk patch notes are completely unrelated to the issue. We don't care what was changed in 2008, we only care about what changed in 2006.
Original Mangos project was started in 2005, you can message TheLuda to ask him how did he get his sources, but expect a response similar to the blizzard gamemaster response.
And finally, the mod aura thingy is not just a thottbot or allakhazam kind of description. It's a core thing that's used on retail, wowhead, our server and any other server and database out there and can be located in the uncompiled .cpp source codes of the emulator. The "physical spell description" are only words, which can be changed at any given point, but they do not have to match the spell's actual functionality (as Blizzard has shown us many times throughout the patches), so I recommend you to not argue about spell descriptions either (I tried it, it's useless).
You are trying to prove that something is different from the current state. Therefore you have to provide the proofs for your claim, accurate for the vanilla version. We don't have to prove anything back to you, in fact we could simply ignore your "reports" if they don't contain the required proofs. I did not ignore you, instead I spent my time to tell you what's wrong with your reports and what would be a solid proof. Try to find it.
Original Mangos project was started in 2005, you can message TheLuda to ask him how did he get his sources, but expect a response similar to the blizzard gamemaster response.
And finally, the mod aura thingy is not just a thottbot or allakhazam kind of description. It's a core thing that's used on retail, wowhead, our server and any other server and database out there and can be located in the uncompiled .cpp source codes of the emulator. The "physical spell description" are only words, which can be changed at any given point, but they do not have to match the spell's actual functionality (as Blizzard has shown us many times throughout the patches), so I recommend you to not argue about spell descriptions either (I tried it, it's useless).
You are trying to prove that something is different from the current state. Therefore you have to provide the proofs for your claim, accurate for the vanilla version. We don't have to prove anything back to you, in fact we could simply ignore your "reports" if they don't contain the required proofs. I did not ignore you, instead I spent my time to tell you what's wrong with your reports and what would be a solid proof. Try to find it.
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
[video=youtube;84OwHLAuQzc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84OwHLAuQzc[/video]
Let make analyze about this :
He is deep prot "seeing" that he is using Holy Shield.
Watch from 6:38 you will clearly see his trinkets are none of them using Spell Damage (carrot and brd tank trinket) , his Weapon is also from Diremaul (quel serar)
He is doing 52 Damage via Consecration .
48 Damage Consecration regular damage without Spell Damage
48 Damage + 10% = 52.8 which mean his consecration would either tick 52 or 53 (shown on the video).
This clearly proves that.
Another thing is his Seal of Righteousness hits for 46 which is again higher by 10% if you use that Weapon (quel'Serar) (test it on Kronos for that) .
Let make analyze about this :
He is deep prot "seeing" that he is using Holy Shield.
Watch from 6:38 you will clearly see his trinkets are none of them using Spell Damage (carrot and brd tank trinket) , his Weapon is also from Diremaul (quel serar)
He is doing 52 Damage via Consecration .
48 Damage Consecration regular damage without Spell Damage
48 Damage + 10% = 52.8 which mean his consecration would either tick 52 or 53 (shown on the video).
This clearly proves that.
Another thing is his Seal of Righteousness hits for 46 which is again higher by 10% if you use that Weapon (quel'Serar) (test it on Kronos for that) .
Last edited:
frederik
Authorized
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2014
So you just assume that the rest of his gear does not have any spelldamage on it? What kind of proof is that? I mean he is definitely using spelldamage gear at some point (you can see it right in the beginning). He is changing gear throughout the video, but you can't verify all his gear and enchants because he does not show it.
Besides you can clearly see that his consecration ticks for 51 to 52 at the part of the video you mentioned.
Besides you can clearly see that his consecration ticks for 51 to 52 at the part of the video you mentioned.
Last edited:
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
at 4:15 you will notice that Consecration damage variate between 52 - 53 etc
That's because of "spell hit" where Consecration would resist "reduce" damage of some ticks.
This include the part with "dogs" tanking where consecration damage variate between 51-52-53-50 .
and no by no mean he used any spell damage , you stand no chance to use "72" spell damage using "carrot trinket+brd tank trinket+quel'serrar" .
72 Spell damage you will need at least 4 pieces of Tier 2 , clearly he didn't use that.
Last edited:
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
it is level based resistance and would resist "partial" damage and not full amount.The reason that the damage variate each tick
frederik
Authorized
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2014
It's still just an assumption and therefore no solid proof. You don't know his gear. There is still room for necklaces, rings a cape and weapon enchants.
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
good luck building up 72 Spell damage via neck,rings,cape,weapon enchants and at same time surviving Raid Tanking.
Consecration variate damage ain't enough proof for your believes even with Video shown .. Good luck with that.
And yeah good luck with your conclusion that is invalid even that the formula show pure 10% increase on Consecration and Seal of Righteousness .
Now open up your Seal of Righteousness and see how much Spell Damage you would need in order to swing 46 damage with "Quel'Serrar" .
Psojed
Authorized
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
Finally we moved forward
See below.And that would be a correct assumption. Paladin tanks as well as warrior tanks aspired to be crit immune by stacking defense, and defense items do not carry spell damage at all.
You can also see the Consecration damage swaps between 57 a 58 in Strat Living, when he tanks a low level (green lvl numbers) skeletons, which are very unlikely to level resist anyting. I don't know what's the source of the damage swapping, I would have to do more research on that first, so I'll put that aside and work with killerduki's theory.
Why would I do that? Also that link to my profile is fkd up, plz fix.
The only thing I see changing in the videos is his weapon, he swaps Bloodlord's Defender (0 spell damage) for Quel'serrar (0 spell damage). Other that that, he's using T1 shoulder, T1 boots, Deathbone legs, MC shield, Deathbone belt, T1 chest (these two are most visible during the Viscidus fight). Given his T1 pieces, he probably doesn't have better equipment available, even though he tanked BWL and AQ, otherwise he would surely use T2 pieces. On the other hand, using spelldamage enchant on weapon is the perfect way to gain more holy damage and thus more threat generation, and his weapons have permanent glows, preventing us from seeing his enchantment. We only know that he's not using any proc enchant like Lifestealing, because that would show up on his overhead display, and I don't think he used something passive like +agility or +int.
---
Instead of arguing about his gear, let's have a look at the spells - he uses Holy Shield for example. If 1H Weapon Spec increased all damage by 10%, his Holy Shield would also get 10% extra, right?
So at first he's tanking Stratholme. At 0:57 his Holy Shield hits for 145. He has Sanctity Aura from another pally, that's +10% Holy Damage. He also has the Plaguelands damage buff, which ranges from 1-5% extra, but that only works on Undead. Base Holy Shield rank 3 damage is 130 (rank 2 is 95).
If 1H Weapon Spec worked on all damage...
Rank 3 damage: 130*1.1(aura)*1.1(1H Spec) = 157,3 = too high.
Rank 2 damage: 95*1.1(aura)*1.1(1H Spec) = 114,95 = too low.
One even crazier option that came to my mind...
Let's say 1H Weapon Spec worked on all damage AND the tank had enough spell damage to raise rank 2 Holy Shield damage to 145.
145/1.1 (removing the sanctity aura bonus) = 131; 131 - 114,95 = 16,05 bonus damage. Holy Shield gains only 5% spell damage per block, he would need 321 spell damage. Given his tanking gear and T1 equipment, that's not possible, plus at that point his Consecration would be hitting 60+ per tick.
Conlusion: One-Handed Weapon Specialization did not increase all damage dealt by the paladin. The video is the proof.
I'd like to point you in the right direction though.
https://vanilla-twinhead.twinstar.cz/?issue=6785
This bugreport states that SoR behaved like a melee attack, that it could proc effects like judgement of wisdom and other procs like Flametongue when Shamans were introduced. There's a source from 2005 (our famous blogspot) and 2007 (EJ discussion) and mainly, there's a 2.1.0 patch note removing this effect, which makes it very plausible.
I'm mentioning this to you, because One Handed Weapon Specialization on vanilla "increases the damage you deal with one-handed melee weapons". If SoR was considered a melee attack, not a spell, its damage would be increased by 1H Weapon Spec. If you can prove the SoR being a melee attack is correct, you have an explanation for [CR]SoR[/CR] 1H Weapon Spec boosting SoR. Find some references from 2006.
Last edited:
"There's a source from 2005 (our famous blogspot) and 2007 (EJ discussion) and mainly, there's a 2.1.0 patch note removing this effect, which makes it very plausible."
Yet my evidence from 2005 about different ranks of Judgement stacking and Killerduki's evidence from patch 2.4 about Judgement of the Crusader stacking being removed by Blizzard isn't legit?
As I posted on the other thread, you will probably state that because Seal Twisting wasn't discovered until TBC, that it wasn't possible during Vanilla because there isn't any evidence of it showing up.
TLDR - The absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence:
https://github.com/FeenixServerProject/Phoenix_1.12.1_Issue_tracker/issues/4025
- well look there, I proved that something which wasn't discovered until TBC was actually there all along during Vanilla from patch 1.11 onwards...
Yet my evidence from 2005 about different ranks of Judgement stacking and Killerduki's evidence from patch 2.4 about Judgement of the Crusader stacking being removed by Blizzard isn't legit?
As I posted on the other thread, you will probably state that because Seal Twisting wasn't discovered until TBC, that it wasn't possible during Vanilla because there isn't any evidence of it showing up.
TLDR - The absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence:
https://github.com/FeenixServerProject/Phoenix_1.12.1_Issue_tracker/issues/4025
- well look there, I proved that something which wasn't discovered until TBC was actually there all along during Vanilla from patch 1.11 onwards...
boogerboy123
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2016
theloras you have to have to be more objective. sor could never proc off seal of blood in tbc, its stated many times alliance had to use seal of justice to make use of seal twisting. it worked for sob but not for sor. sucks but thats how it was. theres no real reason to beleive it worked in vanilla and then not for tbc
now seal of crusader boosting command with a seal twist would make sense. since command is delayed by .5 seconds. but currently i think command procs instantly here. they made the delay so white crits would give vengeance for a command proc and could benefit from that. seal of justice should work for sure and it seal of the crusader imo should work. its logical it should work
Last edited:
killerduki
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2016
Purple Glow is Spell Damage Enchant (where he didn't use) , Green Glow is Agility Enchant (where he used at one point) not sure which one was red.
as far as Holy Shield i need to retest because it was changed 2 times via hotfix by Blizzard , but tell me how would you explain 52-53 damage on Consecration? which is the exactly number of 10% . (ofc damage variate as consecration should never be flat but variation dmg) and if you weapon swap it would go down/up (cystheen noob theory) .
Last edited:
boogerboy123
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2016
i think killerduki is right. the coeficient on cons is not for each tick, but for the whole spell. so if he has a little bit of spell damage it wouldnt do a 10% increase
Psojed
Authorized
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
No, it isn't. Your other issue lacks the confirmation from a 2007 comment as a source and the 2.4 patch clearly states ICON.
But Stacking judgements is another topic, so stop invading other threads with off-topic.
Stop putting your stupid assumptions into my mouth please.
Another off-topic.
---
@killerduki:
Like I said, the weapons have permanent glows. Bloodlord's Defenser is always ORANGE and Quel'Serrar is always GREEN. Even if you enchanted Crusader, Agi, Int, or whatever else with different color, the glow would remain ORANGE for Bloodlord and GREEN for Quel'Serrar. Check the weapon comments if you don't believe me. He could have spelldmg enchant on the weapon, and he could have something else, we don't know.
For the Consecration, I believe this is because Consecration is a DoT. You take the total amount of damage of a DoT, boost it, then divide it into ticks. For example Sanctity aura would be
384 * 1.1 = 422 and this is divided into 8 ticks. If the division into ticks doesn't floor the result, that would explain why some ticks are +1.
422 / 8 = 52,75 so I take the closest whole number and reverse the process.
52 * 8 = 416; 422 - 416 = 6 extra damage
So in this case, my consecration could tick six times as +1, resulting in 53 53 53 53 52 53 52 53 (for example).
Breaking the video into parts...
Strat living side has higher Consecration due to Sanctity Aura.
Strat living side vs. undeads has even higher Consecration due to Echoes of Lordaeron buff which adds 1-5% all damage, but only works on undead.
Strat undead side Baron fight - he has JotC on the boss, but doesn't actually use Consecration.
Dire Maul - you can see Consecration ticks for 50 on the demon.
Scholo butcher - again it ticks for 50 only.
Scholo barov & skellys - they're undeads, Echoes of Lordaeron boosts Consecration damage.
BWL - Consecration numbers not visible
AQ - not visible
MC giant - doesn't use Consecration
MC hounds - switched to Quel'Serrar, he could have new weapon enchantment, we don't know.
[CR]On the hounds, Consecration ticks for 51-52, so if he had +30 spell damage on weapon, it's 384 + 30 = 414; 414 / 8 = 51,75 which would be accurate with abovementioned DoT theory.[/CR] Math in the morning... It's 30/3 as the others stated below.
PS: But the Holy Shield issue would still stand. Sanctity aura boosts all holy dmg by 10%, it applies on the Holy Shield, so there is absolutely no reason that your Holy Shield would not get a boost from "% all damage" buffs. Even if the Consecration ticks look like they're increased by 10%, which fits exactly to the 1H Weapon Spec, you still need to have the same 10% boost on all his damage abilities.
Out of those, I'm not sure only about Blessing of Sanctuary, because that's reactive damage, but I'm pretty sure things like Judgement of Righteousness, Holy Shield would be affected by 1H Weapon Spec if it worked on all damage.
Last edited:
that's cause blizzard nerfed SoR and SoB in patch 2.1 as the notes say and Seal Twisting wasn't discovered until patch 2.3 iirc - http://us.battle.net/wow/en/game/patch-notes/2-1-0
- Seal of Righteousness: This seal will no longer cause additional chances for weapon procs to trigger.
- Seal of Blood: This seal will no longer cause additional chances for weapon procs to trigger.
