This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
DPS wep as tank now?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Xepp
Hello!
I think paladin changes is awsome and I really enjoy tanking on my pally.
I wonder though if it would be beneficial to use a dps wep as tank now. Both CS and HoR is weapon dmg based. And with reforging, loosing 20-30 stamina and some parry/dodge vs more str and crit/haste.
Wouldnt this increase our threat by a decent amount? Is the loss in tank stats made up for by higher wep dmg.
I got Facelifter and Bloodvenom blade.. Facelifter is about 500 dmg and bloodvenom around 800.
That would make CS hit for alot more.
Post by
Synectics
I got Facelifter and Bloodvenom blade.. Facelifter is about 500 dmg and bloodvenom around 800.
That would make CS hit for alot more.
Where are you getting these numbers?
Facelifter
has 205.6 DPS with an average of 329
Bloodvenom
has 226.8 DPS with an average of 589.5
That said, yes, it would make CS hit harder to use the DPS weapon. But you're talking about a loss of Strength for an increase in Agility (which no longer grants armor), and losing Parry and Expertise for Hit and Crit.
Perhaps it could hit a little harder, but I think you're just better off having those tank stats as opposed to a couple abilities hitting marginally better. But I'm not a big number cruncher; hopefully someone else can offer better insight on it.
EDIT: HotR only hits the main target for 30% of weapon damage -- the rest is fixed Holy damage spread across all targets. A DPS weapon probably wouldn't be an increase in AOE threat, but maybe single-target with CS.
Post by
pezz
It looks like he's rounding up from the top-end damage.
Post by
299264
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
93865
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Bloodkittie
It isn't normalized?
Nope.
if it not normalized then a slower weapon will be better right?
Post by
Xepp
It looks like he's rounding up from the top-end damage.
You are correct! I just pulled some numbers I thought it was! :)
There are so much expertise on the armor already. Getting some hit and crit to the loss of parry isnt a big deal imo. Not when you can reforge. Plus, didnt Bizz stated that there will be 1H dps wep with str/stamina in cata? As CS is one of our main abilitys, buffing it would be quite good I think.
Post by
358147
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
93865
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Xiamaru
Hey bro, considering I did 10k DPS on Marrowgar the other day, I am officially no longer a tank.
I am a DPS that holds aggro.
This is why I #$%^ing love Paladin Tanking. I am 100 % serious in every sense of the word. Tanking is genuinly fun now. I am having a blast, AND I am being effective.
Wow 4.0 = Win
Post by
682655
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Xiamaru
this still confusing me.
now most of time im using a dps weapon cause i see big difference on damage so in threat.
plus...with new patch they increased stamina values ONLY in dps weapons...meh!
Kam
I am taking a wild guess here. I am by no means a theorycrafter, and have no idea what Blizzard is thinking whenever they make a change.
But with that said, looking at our tanking skills, I am assuming Blizzard wants Prot Paladins to use dps weapons. This means the stamina buff to DPS-weapons make sense, if it is intended to be used for tanking. Tanks (not including Death Knights) used to prefer fast tanking weapons, and Druids used to like haste to make the attack speed to just above 2.00, making the savage defence more effective. With the new change to most skills relying on pure weapon damage, rather than the dps, the slower the weapon we wield, the better. Since we also now have points for Reckoning (something that was hard to fit into the old talent trees), we are seeing even higher
dps
tps than ever. Everything have started to benefit from the slow 2.6 attack speed weapons now. Sorry rogues, but i'll be needing your weapons from now on :P
Sadly though, the best weapons being the arena ones (Wrathful Gladiator's longblade comes to mind here), I have no chance of ever getting hold of one of the really good ones, as raiding is something I rarely do, except for the early content (Malygos, Naxx...), so my weapon wont ever be better than what can be found in dungeons i'm afraid.
Can't wait to see people go nuts about the tank needing a dps weapon. People have always been like "Lol, QQ moar" whenever a tank piece was ninja'ed by a dps, so actually being allowed to need on an item that is actually a lot better than the existing tanking weapons is pure gold. I expect to see lots of tears, and I will savor every one of them.
Post by
616871
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
It isn't normalized?
Nope.
Last I checked Crusader Strike was Normalized (3.3.5 at 75% weapon damage).
Can you comfirm that it is NOT normalized?
(aka go grab two weapons with different speeds with same weapon type and same DPS and test it)
Seals are not normalized, however, and slow will always give you more threat.
Effect #1: Normalized Weapon Damage
Post by
572779
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Xiamaru
I'm sure the adjustments made to Lv80 weapons were quick and dirty since we won't be using them long.
According to the current cata data, tank weapons will likely be 2.6.
Warriors are having a similar discussion regarding Devastate.
Elementium Fang
Mace of Transformed Bone
The only thing disturbing about the items you posted, are the last one. Feral Attack power? They removed that, didn't they? I have a feeling those wont hit live, so expect their stats to be altered at some point.
Post by
299264
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Varaconn
Technically though, (from my understanding of Normalization from Wowwiki and a few forum posts) wouldn't normalization only affect any (non-weapon-based) additional damage on an attack? For example, attacks that are % Weapon Damage + x would have the same x regardless of speed. Hence, normalized. I won't answer whether it is, in fact, normalized or not, but if it were to only affect that + x portion, it would still mean bigger hits from slower weapons, no?
I might be misinterpreting part of the normalization process, so please correct me if so.
I mean, Sinister Strike for rogue is Normalized, but every rogue knows that you want a slow-as-possible MH for big, beefy SS numbers. Wouldn't the same be true in CS's case?
I'm at home, so I can't test anything myself. It just seems odd to me that Crusader Strike would be labelled Normalized. Even if it is, the damage is purely % weapon damage, so what would the normalization affect?
Post by
blademeld
but if it were to only affect that + x portion, it would still mean bigger hits from slower weapons, no?
Yes.
I'm at home, so I can't test anything myself.
I don't understand.
It just seems odd to me that Crusader Strike would be labelled Normalized. Even if it is, the damage is purely % weapon damage, so what would the normalization affect?
normalized_damage = base_weapon_damage + (Attack Speed * Attack Power / 14)
where normalization states that one handed weapon speed is normalized to 2.4 seconds.
Post by
Lorkin
Hey bro, considering I did 10k DPS on Marrowgar the other day, I am officially no longer a tank.
I am a DPS that holds aggro.
This is why I #$%^ing love Paladin Tanking. I am 100 % serious in every sense of the word. Tanking is genuinly fun now. I am having a blast, AND I am being effective.
Wow 4.0 = Win
Yeah I got some redic numbers last night. I'm semi gearing my Alliance paladin and went into pug ICC last night with a mix of pvp and dps gear. Got around 13k on the trash before marrowgarr, lol. He's in a pretty scrub set as well. Unfortunately I was at the top of the meters, so we didn't get very far. People still don't know how to do Rot, it astounds me.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.