Well no, because with 10% chance you have 10% chance to deal 1.5 times the damage, with 100% you always do 1.5 times the damage. Like, we do agree that, on the same spell it’s better to always crit than to sometimes crit, right ? Please.
And if the spells are different, then, it depends on their damage, the spell with the most damage after taking crit chance average into account wins.
Oh and :
No it’s not. Because if your spell wasn’t a crit and had the same base damage if would deal X, but because it crits it deals 1.5 times X. If you were to increase base damage yo compensate for the lack of crit then yeah, but that’s not what you implied. So it does depend on base damage.
Conclusion : a spell with 1k base damage that always crits (100%) is always 1k5 in PvP, fixed value. The same spell with 10% deals 1k5 sometimes, 1k the rest of the time. The same spell with 0% is always hitting for 1k. You’re telling me 1k5 is always worse than 1k, and you’re telling me sometimes 1k5 and often 1k is better than always 1k5. Where did you learn math my dear Warlock ?
“average amount” is PvE argument
if I have 10% to one shot somebody with health lower than 250k, then it’s on average doing 25k damage
yet it’s better than an ability which does 30k average with 100% occurance
I am just saying that argument “it has 100% crit chance, therefore it’s better than TV which has like 10% crit chance” is flawed
because that 100% crit chance means you are 100% times not doing more damage, that TV means you’re 10% times doing way more damage
Hes actually right, if it has 100% crit chance its same as 0%, if spell with 100% do 1500 its same as spell that deals 1500 and never crit, if you make spell with 100% crit then you dont care about non crit dmg but you balance it around dmg of crit.
juke kick - 0 seconds
stormbolt - 4 seconds
spellreflect - 1 cast (as it should be)
maybe fear - but if a warrior has to fear you to stop a cast, he is already in trouble anyway and has to play defensive
idk maybe I’m biased but I just want cata warrior gameplay back its the biggest bot class after demon hunter these days, feels like ret in pre wotlk patch
I said on the same spell, yes. If Chaos Bolt critted 100% times for 40k or hitted 40k and could never crit it’s the same thing (well tbh actually having 0% crit chance in that case is better)
therefore having spell designed with 100% crit chance is actually downside, you don’t get anything from it
and you “well it might do more damage” - that’s blizzard’s decision, if Chaos Bolt didn’t have 100%crit chance, then they would design it to deal more damage, it being 100%crit chance actually goes into balancing
so you cherry picking my counter argument out of context doesn’t really work
100% crit chance spell will be worse than if the same spell had 10% crit chance, because if the spell had 10% crit chance, they’d balance it to deal more damage
which is me responding to your ad hoc fallacy
my argument was originally different - It’s not true that TV is worse than Chaos Bolt because it crits less often
Then that isn’t the same spell. One has 40k base damage the other one has 26k.
That isn’t the definition of downside. A downside is when you get disadvantaged/lose something. In the current case you yourself claim :
Which makes me wonder about :
How so, if it’s the very same damage ? 0% isn’t better. It’s not, especially since there are mechanics in the game that benefit only crit damage, when there are no damage increase mechanics that benefit only non crit damage. So it’s better to have the crit attribute tied to the spell.
Well no, again, not necessarily. If it is indeed THE SAME SPELL if you remove the crit component it just deals less damage. If we factor a rework of the spell damage then three things. First, it’s no longer the same spell. Second, even if they increased base damage to compensate ans keep overall damage equal you would deal less damage on normal hits, and more when you crit, but only 1/10 times and you have no control over when. And third, the precedent point doesn’t make the spell better necessarily it depends on a lot of factors. In this case, without the crit, so with less damage 9/10 you would need more bolts to kill. When today you do twice 40k you’d do twice, say, 30k most of the time, sometimes 30+45, and very rarely twice 45. That would make very cool videos where you double crit wity all cds and delete someone under defensives, but that wouldn’t be what happens consistently and would be luck based with no outplay possible (i mean if the guy had all defensives up and died because absurd damage…). And today, you valiantly defend the fact that warlocks never touch people with cds. So if that’s true what you need is the best Chaos possible on the rest of the game which is sustained pressure. And that’s with an autocrit. But that’s of course debatable as people might have a different approach than mine and that was my point of view. Just keep in mind that these words are also true for you and that the fact that you think warlock would be better off with a chaos bolt that deals less damage and can crit a few k higher than currently on a 10% chance doesn’t make it true.
You can’t really compare. TV can crit for 100k sometimes. Chaos too. Chaos is casted and can therefore be LoS’ed or interrupted. But Verdict cannot be spammed like Chaos. Verdict requires melee range, puts the Paladin in danger against other melees, requires the paladin to reach ranged targets. Bolt is from a distance, which is then an advantage.
You know what’s the conclusion? These spells are different. One is melee the other isn’t. One is casted the other isn’t. One can be half spammed the other cannot. One requires to be 5y away feom target the other requires 40. They don’t consume the same resources and same resources do not build the same way. They don’t have the same damage range. One always benefits from stuff like Skyfury the other doesn’t. Bottom line ? You cannot say CB is worse or CB is better than TV.
It crits but its damage is halved. Chaos Bolt has been working like that for a good while now.
Anything that modifies crit chance gets turned into a direct %dmg modifier for CB. (It’s a bit weird to apply it in that specific case and as to why the damage gets halved, but it is still logical if you think about it)
Yes but that 1.5% is already factored in. CB does 75% damage against PvP targets without considering any further CB “nerf” adjustment. Fun and little known fact: Tanks in PvP are considered PvE targets for damage modifiers applied to everyone else.
Comparison: My CB without buffs hits mobs for 50-55k, PvP targets get hit for 37.5k- 41.25k. A tank would still get hit for 50-55k.
MSBT is one of the best Addons because it gives you these tidbits of information you’d otherwise not really get or glance over. I know for what exact amount of damage every single ability hits at all times, and for what I get hit by what at all times.
This made me curious, though. It’s a very specific case and I’d like to actually test it out. What exactly is that pet ability called? Typing in “Ros” doesn’t really yield anything.
Nvm, found it. Roar of Sacrifice. Now to find a willing Hunter to test this out…
I’d assume its for other damage modifiers aswell. Any time I fight a tank, I really notice that all my damage numbers are the exact same as against open world mobs.
It’s Blizzards way of balancing them out.
I wish that they’d finally disclose the inner workings of PvP scaling and all that jazz… because it’s very unclear and we can only assume stuff.
It’s weird because you see some modifiers on Rogue are on the Rogue even if the spell I use goes on my target. For instance both Vendetta and Toxic Blade are 30% in PvE and 20% in PvP. I am almost certain that if I unleash Vendetta on a tank it doesn’t go up to 30% for the time it’s on him. But I guess that is a different kind of PvP mod than what’s with the crit or with spell that directly deal damage.
![:smiley:](https://d1bg94bbsh66ji.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/smiley.png?v=6" ":smiley:")
its the biggest bot class after demon hunter these days, feels like ret in pre wotlk patch