Jump to content

Photo

Unholy pvp spec


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#21 Arcturus

Arcturus
  • Members
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • US-Ner'zhul
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 743
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 12:24 AM

Well i tried Unholy Presence with a bunch of PvE tests a while back, and all the reduced GCD meant was that i was able to spend more time doing nothing, while i waited for runes to come back off cooldown. Perosnal preference i guess, but Blood is my chosen presence for PvP when on the offensive.
  • 0

#22 Steamboat

Steamboat

Posted 05 November 2008 - 01:25 AM

Well i tried Unholy Presence with a bunch of PvE tests a while back, and all the reduced GCD meant was that i was able to spend more time doing nothing, while i waited for runes to come back off cooldown. Perosnal preference i guess, but Blood is my chosen presence for PvP when on the offensive.


remember PvP is pretty dynamic sometimes you're going to be off an on your target due to CC and kiting. with this in mind the 1s GCD can make a big difference to frontload damage once you catch them before they slip away.
  • 0

#23 Dynimight

Dynimight
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • US-Firetree
  • Reckoning
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 03:20 AM

Blood presence = pve
Unholy presence = pvp
frost presence = tanking

Frost presence can be good to switch to if you get focused, but using blood presence over Unholy presence in pvp seems pretty silly... 1 second global > 15% dmg any day. You do your damage in bursts. I can't think of very many times I've pvped in unholy presence where I don't have a rune to use or runic power to burn.
  • 0

#24 Deccard

Deccard
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • EU-Die Silberne Hand
  • Blutdurst
  • Posts: 1,367
  • Talents: Affliction

Posted 05 November 2008 - 11:08 AM

I exclusively used Blood Presence.
Your argument about burst is weak. 15% more damage on your heavy hiting moves is more burst than getting off an extra weak move of some kind.
  • 0

#25 Dynimight

Dynimight
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • US-Firetree
  • Reckoning
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 02:32 PM

I exclusively used Blood Presence.
Your argument about burst is weak. 15% more damage on your heavy hiting moves is more burst than getting off an extra weak move of some kind.


Uh, no. Your argument is the weak one. Think please. If you're on a target unloading attacks, you're going to do more damage with unholy presence. 2 attacks at 115% dmg are going to do way less damage than 3 attacks at 100% dmg.

This is a melee class that is easy to kite. You do damage in bursts. You are not going to be sitting on a target with nothing to do. You're going to be peeled, CCed, or kited. When you get to you target, being able to get off 3 attacks instead of 2 is going to net you way more damage in burst.

And then there's the teeny weeny detail about being able to react 1/3 faster to dynamic pvp situations because you're not sitting there with a warrior gcd.
  • 0

#26 Steamboat

Steamboat

Posted 05 November 2008 - 03:36 PM

and if white damage is ~40% of our damage like people say it is. thats still a ~6% increase.
  • 0

#27 Fayde

Fayde
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • EU-Outland
  • Misery
  • Posts: 472
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 04:56 PM

Uh, no. Your argument is the weak one. Think please. If you're on a target unloading attacks, you're going to do more damage with unholy presence. 2 attacks at 115% dmg are going to do way less damage than 3 attacks at 100% dmg.

This is a melee class that is easy to kite. You do damage in bursts. You are not going to be sitting on a target with nothing to do. You're going to be peeled, CCed, or kited. When you get to you target, being able to get off 3 attacks instead of 2 is going to net you way more damage in burst.

And then there's the teeny weeny detail about being able to react 1/3 faster to dynamic pvp situations because you're not sitting there with a warrior gcd.


This.
Blood Presence with Unholy Aura for leveling though.
  • 0

#28 Hysteric

Hysteric

Posted 05 November 2008 - 05:54 PM

Uh, no. Your argument is the weak one. Think please. If you're on a target unloading attacks, you're going to do more damage with unholy presence. 2 attacks at 115% dmg are going to do way less damage than 3 attacks at 100% dmg.

This is a melee class that is easy to kite. You do damage in bursts. You are not going to be sitting on a target with nothing to do. You're going to be peeled, CCed, or kited. When you get to you target, being able to get off 3 attacks instead of 2 is going to net you way more damage in burst.

And then there's the teeny weeny detail about being able to react 1/3 faster to dynamic pvp situations because you're not sitting there with a warrior gcd.


Would a 15% increase in attack speed really give you 3 hits in the time it takes you normally to make 2? Something about that doesn't sound right. I would assume it would have to be a 50% increase for that to work out.

Or is it because of the .5 seconds off the gc?... well the gc is normally 1.5 seconds right? so that means attack [1 second] attack [1 second] attack [1 second] Attack vs attack [1.5 seconds] attack [1.5 seconds] attack... so wouldn't it be 4 swings vs 3?
  • 0

#29 Dynimight

Dynimight
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • US-Firetree
  • Reckoning
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 06:18 PM

Or is it because of the .5 seconds off the gc?... well the gc is normally 1.5 seconds right? so that means attack [1 second] attack [1 second] attack [1 second] Attack vs attack [1.5 seconds] attack [1.5 seconds] attack... so wouldn't it be 4 swings vs 3?

This, not the attack speed.

In a 6 second window of spamming abilities, you'll be able to get off 4 specials in blood presence (1.5+1.5+1.5+1.5=6), or 6 specials in unholy presence (1+1+1+1+1+1=6). I wasn't factoring in white damage. In the scenario listed above, those 4 attacks do 15% more damage than the 6 in unholy presence.

Think of it this way. Pretend all your attacks do 100 damage. You get 6 seconds of dps time on your target before getting peeled.
Blood presence: 4 attacks X 115 damage = 460 damage
Unholy presence 6 attacks at 100 damage = 600 damage

How is this even a serious question?

Also, if your argument is that you are standing there with nothing to do in unholy presence because you have zero runic power and no runes available, there are 2 possible explanations:
1. You have a terrible spec/glyphs and aren't getting the right talents to keep your runic power up and runes refreshed.
2. You're fighting terrible opponents, and you might as well fight in frost presence with a single 1h on the whole time because a win is inevitable.
  • 0

#30 Hysteric

Hysteric

Posted 05 November 2008 - 06:22 PM

K thanks makes sense
Edit: For the record I wasn't arguing with you i wasn't trying to find out how it worked

hmm im guessing 21/0/50 is the way to go... I heard a lot of people are picking up lichborne and I am curious what they are giving up for it and what that spec would look like.

This, not the attack speed.

In a 6 second window of spamming abilities, you'll be able to get off 4 specials in blood presence (1.5+1.5+1.5+1.5=6), or 6 specials in unholy presence (1+1+1+1+1+1=6). I wasn't factoring in white damage. In the scenario listed above, those 4 attacks do 15% more damage than the 6 in unholy presence.

Think of it this way. Pretend all your attacks do 100 damage. You get 6 seconds of dps time on your target before getting peeled.
Blood presence: 4 attacks X 115 damage = 460 damage
Unholy presence 6 attacks at 100 damage = 600 damage

How is this even a serious question?

Also, if your argument is that you are standing there with nothing to do in unholy presence because you have zero runic power and no runes available, there are 2 possible explanations:
1. You have a terrible spec/glyphs and aren't getting the right talents to keep your runic power up and runes refreshed.
2. You're fighting terrible opponents, and you might as well fight in frost presence with a single 1h on the whole time because a win is inevitable.


Edited by Hysteric, 05 November 2008 - 06:27 PM.

  • 0

#31 Dynimight

Dynimight
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • US-Firetree
  • Reckoning
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 06:40 PM

K thanks makes sense
Edit: For the record I wasn't arguing with you i wasn't trying to find out how it worked

hmm im guessing 21/0/50 is the way to go... I heard a lot of people are picking up lichborne and I am curious what they are giving up for it and what that spec would look like.


Yeah, I know you weren't arguing. I was responding to some of the other claims I read in this thread.

21/0/50 is the spec I'd lean toward also. You give up too much to get lichborne. Toughness would be very nice, but I'm not sure if it's worth the what you'd lose in unholy for it. Probably will depend heavily on the bracket and composition.
  • 0

#32 Steamboat

Steamboat

Posted 05 November 2008 - 07:01 PM

whats up with the 51 point talents except for hungering cold sucking for pvp?

another thing reguarding unholy presence. If you are frost/unholy between the 25% haste from imp icy talons and the 15% from the aura you are going to be proccing killing machine and blood caked blade a ton which again, gives you great burst which is what the spec is all about.

Edited by Steamboat, 05 November 2008 - 08:16 PM.

  • 0

#33 Hysteric

Hysteric

Posted 05 November 2008 - 07:26 PM

Yeah, I know you weren't arguing. I was responding to some of the other claims I read in this thread.

21/0/50 is the spec I'd lean toward also. You give up too much to get lichborne. Toughness would be very nice, but I'm not sure if it's worth the what you'd lose in unholy for it. Probably will depend heavily on the bracket and composition.


I am trying to decide if i should put the last two points in rage of rivendare or pick up unholy aura for my arena partners... i figure though they'll have some type of speed enchant on their boots so im better off with rivendare.

Toughness seems like a good talent but i really dont want to give up anything for it. It seems like it would just be a luxury for bad playing... most likely the snare will be reapplied frequently so you'd have to figure out how to play while being snared, or how to prevent the snare from going up in the first place. But that's just my opinion and im probably going to be flamed for it.

the only way i really see picking up toughness is if you're a troll

Edited by Hysteric, 05 November 2008 - 07:30 PM.

  • 0

#34 Desmond

Desmond
  • Junkies
  • Goblinclass_name
  • US-Destromath
  • Rampage
  • Posts: 275
  • Talents: Affliction

Posted 05 November 2008 - 08:40 PM

another thing reguarding unholy presence. If you are frost/unholy between the 25% haste from imp icy talons and the 15% from the aura you are going to be proccing killing machine and blood caked blade a ton which again, gives you great burst which is what the spec is all about.



15% haste is always worse than 15% damage. For the purposes of BCB and Necrosis it's a wash, but since special attacks do more than 50% of your damage, it's effectively 7.5% damage increase + w/e killing machine adds vs 15%.

Also, talking about sustained white DPS in a pvp situation is fairly silly, as if your white damage is sustainable, then your yellow damage is too, and if your yellow damage is sustainable, you might as well be in blood presence because you'll be running into rune/RP gen caps.

Unholy presence is good. Blood presence is good. Different situations call for each of them. Successful DKs will figure out what works when.
  • 0

#35 Steamboat

Steamboat

Posted 05 November 2008 - 08:59 PM

15% haste is always worse than 15% damage. For the purposes of BCB and Necrosis it's a wash, but since special attacks do more than 50% of your damage, it's effectively 7.5% damage increase + w/e killing machine adds vs 15%.

Also, talking about sustained white DPS in a pvp situation is fairly silly, as if your white damage is sustainable, then your yellow damage is too, and if your yellow damage is sustainable, you might as well be in blood presence because you'll be running into rune/RP gen caps.

Unholy presence is good. Blood presence is good. Different situations call for each of them. Successful DKs will figure out what works when.


If you're implying I was trying to argue 15% haste is > than 15% damage you are wrong.
  • 0

#36 Dynimight

Dynimight
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • US-Firetree
  • Reckoning
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 09:01 PM

It doesn't sound like you read my post at all. I wasn't talking about white damage. I was talking about special attacks. Unholy is > blood for just about every possible pvp situation imaginable.
  • 0

#37 Desmond

Desmond
  • Junkies
  • Goblinclass_name
  • US-Destromath
  • Rampage
  • Posts: 275
  • Talents: Affliction

Posted 05 November 2008 - 09:19 PM

Steamboat:
I was suggesting that stacking 15% from unholy presence + 25% from imp icy talons is strictly worse than 25% from imp icy talons + 15% from blood presence in a strict DPS setting, all else being equal.

Dynimight:
Your argument assumes that there will NEVER be a time where you're going toe to toe with someone in pvp. Any time that you can do sustained DPS to a target over a period 10 seconds, blood will be the better presence for damage. There is a line, somewhere between 6 and 10 seconds where unholy becomes better. The exact placement of that line depends on RP and cooldowns.

NB: I'm not trying to argue that blood > unholy always and forever. I'm saying that they both have useful situations, and sticking with one prejudicially will make you a weaker deathknight.
  • 0

#38 Arcturus

Arcturus
  • Members
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • US-Ner'zhul
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 743
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 09:38 PM

Also, if your argument is that you are standing there with nothing to do in unholy presence because you have zero runic power and no runes available, there are 2 possible explanations:
1. You have a terrible spec/glyphs and aren't getting the right talents to keep your runic power up and runes refreshed.
2. You're fighting terrible opponents, and you might as well fight in frost presence with a single 1h on the whole time because a win is inevitable.


lol?

There is no argument in this... it comes down to how you want to play. Sorry but when i get on someone, i want my diseases and strikes to hit as hard as they can, then spread them for maximum damage, and low and be hold if they escape, my diseases are doing 15% more damage on them.
  • 0

#39 Dynimight

Dynimight
  • Members
  • Gnomeclass_name
  • US-Firetree
  • Reckoning
  • Posts: 1,410
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 10:29 PM

lol?

There is no argument in this... it comes down to how you want to play. Sorry but when i get on someone, i want my diseases and strikes to hit as hard as they can, then spread them for maximum damage, and low and be hold if they escape, my diseases are doing 15% more damage on them.


Seriously? Disease damage? Your diseases are such an incredibly small part of your damage that it shouldn't even be a factor in your choice of presence. Diseases are only important for the debuff the provide and the damage buff they provide to your other attacks, not their damage, lol.

In fact, if you're worried about diseases, you should be in unholy anyways because you'll be able to apply them that much more quickly, and you'll be able to perform strikes before a dispeller has time to remove them. You have presented no argument here, whatsoever. What in the hell are you arguing? If you want to do maximum damage when you get on someone, you'll be in unholy, as I showed with my example above. You'll do more damage with blood when you can only get a single attack off. Grats on that.

Desmond: Ok, I can kind of see your point there, but that situation is oh so rare where you'll be going toe to toe with someone else without being stunned, kited, or cc'ed. If you're fighting a rogue toe to toe, you're going to get stunned, so you're going to do more damage during your unstunned time with all the extra attacks you can put out. I really only see your argument applying to warriors and other deathknights. Even then, the damage you gain is virtually insignificant. Have you ever tried to dps in unholy presence? The damage difference in pve would be negligible as unholy if it weren't for the dead time waiting for runes to refresh, and that situation just isn't really going to happen in pvp.

As frost, I can output almost identical dps in unholy presence as I can in blood presence because you can make use of all of the extra globals. There is no downtime as frost with a full pve rotation in unholy aura if you do it correctly.

Also, you need to spend a rune to change presences, so that extra miniscule amount of damage you may have gained is probably still going to add up to a damage loss.
  • 0

#40 Arcturus

Arcturus
  • Members
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • US-Ner'zhul
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 743
  • Talents:

Posted 05 November 2008 - 11:44 PM

My two diseases come from a ranged attack and one melee attack... sorry, but i don't have trouble applying all my necessary debuffs while in Blood presence.

Note how i included the word "strikes" in there too.

I said straight up... there is no argument here, it comes down to personal preference as to what presence you want to use. You quoted my post on why i choose to do what i do.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

<