Shadenox provided mathematical proof, I wouldnt have wasted my time on that for you, here you go.
Show me proof of warlocks going mastery>haste. Give me average haste value of top 200 locks, then we can talk, I want proof as well.
Yes, warlocks do crit that high just watch some streams, too lazy to provide any proof and waste more than couple seconds of my precious time on arguing with you here.
You didnât have. So you claimed it was impossible. You even said âdid that. Impossibleâ. I could link the thread (edit : oh, I did in the end⌠At the end of my post). And now I learn that you donât have all the haste traits every top lock has ? I think in that case the thing people usually say is âyou liedâ.
As for the unreasonable amount of haste it is pretty clear in my post that I ONLY used values directly taken from the armory (which I linked) or from the game with the % given to me by my own Overwhelming Power, and this information is available to all by opening their wow client and equipping a piece with Overwhelming Power. I didnât make ANY value up.
Even when faced with direct evidence (armory link + a trait you yourself own + the mathematical explanation step by step with formulas used so numbers arenât created out of nowhere) you still find a way to disregard it. Pathetic.
You must be stupid. I told you the formula to get 0.75s GCD. If you had a brain you would have been able to understand yourself without me telling you that to get to that you need 100% haste. Any more haste doesnât reduce it further, any less and the GCD is longer. Now using the formula for cast time you should have been able, yourself, to understand that with 100% haste Chaos Bolt cast becomes 1.05s.
Now lets see that math power⌠0.75+1.05+1.05⌠WAIT. WAIT. BUT ITâS 2.85 ! ITâS LESS THAN THREE !! HOW IS IT POSSIBLE !!! Youâre an idiot and you show it every time you try to be smart. I will give you again details about the next quote to help the slow you understand fully.
So when I wrote that you understand, I hope, that I took into account 25% base + 15% from Reverse Entropy + 24% from Overwhelming Power AT 430 ILVL. For a total of 64%.
Now I have time to kill so Iâll develop that even more to make you shut up.
At 445 (so 450 if enough neck level) OP is, according to game tooltips, available to all, roughly 7% more powerful than at 430. The 24% haste becomes 25.7%.
At 445 (450) ONE Flashpoint gives 744 Haste. OP, at 430 when it gave 8%, was giving 725. So Flashpoint gives, with those 744 haste, 8.2%. I do hope you are able to do that kind of math without me detailing the how and the why. Anyways three flashpoints are then 24.6%.
So in the end the haste is 25+15+25.7+24.6⌠How much is that ? Itâs 90.3. Yes 90.3% of haste.
Whatâs the GCD then ? Itâs 0.788s.
Whatâs Chaos Bolt cast ? Itâs 1.103s.
Lets add the three ? 0.788+1.103+1.103 = 2.994.
I DO NOT KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT IN MY WORLD 2.994 IS BELOW 3.
And I took the exact numerical values officially provided by the tooltips and made you a perfectly accurate mathematical explanation.
I might add, I took a base haste of 25% when one of the armory profiles I LINKED has 29%. And I did not link them all. Also we assumed that Coil instantly hits the target (and we were still below three) when itâs not very often the case.
See, you talk a lot, you use big letters and bold characters but in the end youâre just wrong, and whatâs worst is you think youâre right.
Have a look at what you yourself answered when I told you about 2 bolts under a coil :
https://eu.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/5-destruction-buff/68167/74
So I guess in the end the only liar is you, not me. Or maybe you donât lie, maybe you indeed really tried and youâre just incompetent, and werenât able to understand the impact of the one trait you missed and the haste you lacked. And you were unable to do 5 mins of math to verify, youâd rather accuse someone of lying to cover your ignorance, your incompetence and your laziness. Your own lies. Because if you werenât able to get 3 traits aâd decent haste then your test was a charade. Truly pathetic. Waste of space.
Super muscular ultra instinct post.
you lost your validity right here
yes they crit, because itâs 100% crit chance
itâs like saying how much damage Gpy non-crit does
Well, yes in realistic scenario with all procs up. You didnât prove that itâs possible for unrealistic scenario.
Itâs not less than 2.4
i counted with realistic scenario and was really benevolent
if you want to be nitpicky, then yes, Locks donât play as much Haste and enemies apparently play Relentless, thatâs 2.4 sec, not 3 sec
2.85 > 2.4
you donât account fo OP drops, so actually your math is wrong 
I guess it seems that way from your POV if youâre unable to account in for all factors and you count only the positive ones
Boys im not sure what this is about but iâm pretty sure you can do 2 bolts in 3 seconds and i dont even use haste>mastery gear. Also i checked some of my clips and its not even that rare since stuff like flashpoint, haste enchant (if used), backdaft, that green haste buff have actually decent/ very high uptime. Also i use around 20% haste and there are people with much higher haste than me + they use haste trinkets such as tol dagor trinket/ins card/mechagon card which i do not use.
Sorry brĂĄĹĄko nemĂĄĹĄ pravdu :).
Also most people i face play trinket not rele.
Thatâs funny Iâm pretty sure healers were playing trinket in the last AWC and Iâm pretty sure the winning MLD team made quite a few goes on healers with bash coil just like they did on rogue.
Oh and about the haste⌠Again, I looked at the haste Warlocks have on top 50. I provided the links. And the only procs are OP and RE. RE is actually proccing quite often so itâs all about getting a OP proc when Coil is off CD which isnât a super unrealistic thing.
Warlock on first page in EU leaderboard at least in 2s claiming lots of people play trinket, that warlocks play haste trinkets and have decent haste, and that 2 bolts in 3s is possible.
Idiot who actually claims he doesnât even play Warlock but somehow acts as he knows best than those who do.
Well well wellâŚ
I swear, reading that massive post of yours felt pretty similar to watching p0rn.
Youâve earned a fanboi right here. Shadenox for president! \m/
This made both me and my brother start laughing out loud! Thank you!
Shadenox you won. You went out and did the math and batistabombâd Whisperer down.
Now enjoy your internet glory, fleeting as it is.
hmm a 2.2kexp 409 ilvl warlock knows better than multi r1s/multi glads/blizzcon competitors.
This lad must be the most re*arded an ingorant person ive ever seen arguing.
Whisperer: i aM rEaLLy gOoD aT mAtH !1!1!11!1
Shadenox: Hold my daggers.
I never claimed so.
You talked against what multi r1s have said about your beloved class. Not even going to start argue with a tunnelvisioned child.
isnât the same thing
unless you believe that some people are never wrong, which in my opinion is extremely stupid belief to have
I lost my validity, just like you got lost in your little big lies that you were spreading. I said warlocks do CRIT that high just so you wouldnt nitpick me for saying hit, they do actually both do hit and crit, they hit when they connect so they dont miss, they crit whenever they hit, which is 100 % of the time, what would you want me to say? âWarlocks crit that high 100% of the time?â that would be the biggest lie ever since they sometimes crit for more sometimes for less. Get outta here with that bs.
he didnât account for OP decay and relentless, so he did the math wrong, you may agree with him and also ignore some stuff just that proves you wrong, but that has nothing to do with maths
mathematically - wise - he was wrongâŚ
No.
who knows whisperer if you repeat âHeâs wrong, everybody else is wrongâ a hundred times before you go to bed every night maybe itâll be so eventually
Actually i just randomly checked cast time of my chaos bolt and it was exactly 1 second so its possible to cast 2 bolts even in relentless even tho its not that often cos i had all procs. And btw i have 1 overwhelming power and like 10% less haste than some other locks.
Oh well. So much for âit is impossible I triedâ.