The Queue: You can't take Spell Power away from me

There's a great question about the mechanics of spell casting when a proc / buff is or is not active. It's a very fine point that most people don't consider, and it's a mechanic that has been reiterated by Ghostcrawler and company recently. Take a few minutes to read it, you'll be glad you did.
Today's reading music is Frank Sinatra and Natalie Cole singing They Can't Take That Away From Me.
I love the way we dance 'till three.
Mortur asked...
"Now that the Battle.net conversion has been released for a while and bugs have been being dealt with, do you feel that there is much reason anymore for holding off on converting your account to Battle.net? Have the authentication issues after a patch been going away?"
I would recommend you upgrade at this point. Things have definitely been getting a lot better, and lately if there are authentication issues the problems have been affecting every form of authentication. It's assumed that Blizzard will eventually "force" the upgrade on everyone, although there is no indication they'll do this soon. If you want the new Mountain Dew Battle Bot pet you're going to need to upgrade your account to Battle.net, so you have some more incentive there.
Veliaf asked a long but very good question...
"I know that, if you cast a spell that has to physically travel to reach the target (i.e. Shadow Bolt) and a SP buff (or similar) procs between the time it leaves your fingers and the time it hits the mob, the buff won't affect the damage of the spell.
My questions are:
1. If the SP buff procs during the time you're casting the spell, will it affect the spell's damage?"
No. It will affect the next spell for which the proc could apply.
"2. If the buff procs and you have DoTs on the mob, for example, will the ticks of the DoTs during the period the buff is active for be affected by the added SP, or will they do damage as if you had the SP you had when you cast the DoT?"
No, effects must be active prior to the spell being cast for the effect to be applied.
"3. If you start casting the spell with the buff active and the buff is lost during the casting time, does that spell still gain the extra SP?"
Yes, the buff is applied to the spell at the beginning of the cast time.
"4. If you cast the spell with the buff active and the buff is lost between the time the spell leaves your fingers and the time it reaches the mob, does the spell still gain the extra SP?"
Yes, because the buff is already applied to the spell.
Discolando asked...
"Considering Blizzard has put in considerable effort to make all specs viable, could we see an effort to make non-standard specs more viable? Specifically, I am thinking of the classic Shockadin spec (ie, Holy/Ret caster based DPS). BC and WotLK have both brought remarkable improvements in the potential output of Shockadins and the only significant things we're lacking now to be viable in end-game raiding is gear specific to the play style (plate with spell hit) and a small buff to bring us to the level of other hybrid dps classes. I for one would instantly change my Paladin to a Shockadin spec full time if it were possible to bring this specific kind of reliable dps and healing to a raid with one spec."
Anything is possible. I would be surprised to see this level of class balancing however. Look over at the official forums, look at the number of posts on WoW.com, look at the comments here: everyone is already complaining about some balance issue in all the given specs already. Combination specs like a Shockadin would be hell to balance around, and would take up even more of Blizzard's time – when it's clear they already have their hands full balance the current specs.
This isn't to say that gear and minor adjustments won't be made to make such a spec choice viable for end game raiding, I just wouldn't see it getting as much attention as a pure Ret build.
Nobag80 asked...
"Why is it that the majority of people I see and read about online play Horde? Why does it seem that Alliance is a joke to the crew of WoW.com and the majority of readership as it seems. Every time someone says something about an Alliance player it's "reroll Horde". And how come I see horde stickers everywhere on peoples' cars but no alliance..... anything?"
There is really no bias here. People percieve Horde / Alliance and class biases everywhere they go. The Alliance people think that Blizzard loves the Horde, and the Horde thinks that Blizzard only cares about the Alliance. Paladins think that Ghostcrawler only loves Hunters, and Hunters think that Ghostcrawler only loves Paladins.
When in reality Ghostcrawler only loves ponies, and I still haven't gotten mine.
Bpow asked...
"I am looking to get a new Mac Book Pro and wondering if 2gb of RAM will be enough to run WoW smoothly. Any thoughts?"
It's going to run WoW great if you have your settings at mid-level. Max level settings probably will cause your frame rate to drop to unacceptable levels, but they do that on most machines that don't have really good graphics cards.
Filed under: The Queue






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
Josin Jun 10th 2009 11:09AM
I love lamp.
islandstyle Jun 10th 2009 11:10AM
Thanks for an early edition of "The Queue". I always look forward to this post.
Talmar Jun 10th 2009 11:12AM
AS to the last question, I also found that the systems processor plays a HUGE part in your FPS. I was actually surprised at how much.
Somebody with a decent graphics card that upgrades their processor to a really good process can see a really good FPS increase.
So...WoW relies both on the graphics card as well as the processor. Having a great team makes WoW great, having 1 of the two be great will still have good results, just not as good.
micgillam Jun 10th 2009 11:52AM
Blizzard has a fantastic history for making games work well even on older hardware (at time of release). I can vouch for the processor bearing more of the load (for the graphics) than some other games that shift more of that load to the GPU. I can run at perfectly reasonable fps with the settings way up, and my PC is 5 years old with a mediocre video card by today's standards (Radeon X1600) and really powerful albeit single-core processor (HT P4 Extreme 3.8ghz ), only 2GB RAM in it. I do choose to turn the graphic detail down for a performance gain, but it's perfectly playable on high (not max).
SmokeTheBear Jun 10th 2009 12:44PM
It's also worth noting that 2GB of RAM is likely going to leave you with adequate performance everywhere except Dalaran. I'd recommend going with the maximum you can afford, and watching your system resources in real-time while you're playing so that when frames start dropping you can see why. Every single person in my guild who was running with 2GB or under of RAM didn't notice any problems until they hit Dalaran, at which time the game became virtually unplayable. Having experienced the same phenomenon in old-school AV on my old powerbook, I recognized the RAM slowdown (RAM delays look different than, for example, processor or video card overload) and tossed another couple gigs in my box, and recommended the same for the members of my guild. Everyone's problems were solved.
It looks like Dalaran uses about 3-3.5GB of RAM, on my box. Your mileage may vary based on time of day, server population, etc., but I'd say 2GB is the bare minimum for maintaining a playable game.
Blake Grant Jun 10th 2009 1:06PM
I run WoW on a MacBook Pro (the 9600 GT version) in Windows XP and it does run ok, though not as good as I was hoping. With graphics all the way up except shadows at 1680x1050 I get around 15-30 fps in Dalaran. 25 man Ulduar can get as low as 8 if I don't drop a lot of settings, so I tend to play with everything on lowest (still at 1680x1050 - the native resolution of the monitor I have connected to it) except spell detail at half and projected textures on (otherwise I can't see some important effects) and get around 15-20 most of the time in a raid.
My girlfriend just bought a Sony Vaio with mostly lower specs (slower CPU, lower rated graphics chip, but more RAM), running at 1920x1080 with everything at full except shadows and it destroys my framerate (she rarely dips below 30). I'm not sure why :/
SaintStryfe Jun 10th 2009 2:01PM
I run WoW on Mac OS X, with a Core Duo iMac with 2 gigs of RAM and I get good performance, overall: 30-40 FPS almost all the time. While raiding I sometimes drop to 25. I keep most of my settings down. The only place that's really bad is Dalaran, where I can dip to 15 during peak times. Play with your graphics settings for best performance.
I recently tested WoW on my brother's 9400m Mac Mini and was pleased with the performance- though his unwillingness to give me much time led me to only run around Ironforge for a bit though. He also only has 1 gig of RAM. Stacked with 4 gigs (which I believe is the Mini's top RAM now), i could see it being very nice.
Personally, if I were you, I would hold off buying a desktop Mac for a short while. I think the Core i7 will be debuting end of summer. But the lappies were just refreshed at WWDC, and I think they're fantastic. I got my hands on one to inspect and they're rock solid machines, good graphics, Firewire, and the battery is incredible. I couldn't run WoW on it but if it runs as good as every other Mac with the similar graphics, you should be fine.
But general rules apply: As much RAM as you can afford, buy with stock RAM and buy it after market. It's easy to install in a Laptop and you'll pay a lot less then Apple's preinstalled. You also will get the system faster.
BigBep Jun 10th 2009 3:23PM
i've been running wow on a macbook (not pro) for about a year now and with all the settings down all the way i can raid and do whatever. dalaran can be bad at times, with my fps going down as far as 7 or 8 fps. kinda sucks but the rest of the gameplay is just fine...i don't really miss the decreased settings as long as i get to play.
BigBep Jun 10th 2009 3:24PM
oh yeah the reason for my post was to say you should definitely be fine with a macbook pro. my friend uses one for wow and he has a shit load of addons and stuff and he runs extremely smoothly when i've seen him in raids.
BigBep Jun 10th 2009 3:25PM
sorry to spam, we both have 2 gigs.
realized i forgot that part.
Clevins Jun 10th 2009 5:58PM
Blake - why run in Windows? Run the Mac client.
Alithoe Jun 10th 2009 7:17PM
I'll vouch for being able to play on abysmal systems. When I started in BC, I started on a laptop with 512 megs of RAM, 64 of which was dedicated to video (leaving me with 440ish), a 1.6 GHz processor and some other slower features. I had about 8 fps in the field, 14 in an instance (which was part of the reason I loved them so much), and about .25 in Shatt.
Wrath came out and conveniently coincided with my laptop's power supply burning out (literally), and I upgraded to a whopping 512 RAM with a 32(? 64? I'm still not sure about it) MB video card and a 1.8ish processor. Everything was at least four years old and it runs wrath (though I still manage a whopping .25 or less fps in dalaran. Hearthing and flying in will almost always disconnect me if I'm not careful. Same applies for the Argent Tournament). So yeah, chances are: you can run WoW. It won't be perfect, but it's possible.
Turtlehead Jun 11th 2009 7:30PM
SaintStryfe said,
"Personally, if I were you, I would hold off buying a desktop Mac for a short while. I think the Core i7 will be debuting end of summer."
We'll see. Apple has never offered a Mac option with a real gaming configuration that I can remember, at any price point. They may keep using the non-consumer Intel chips high end and wait for the new lower end i7 revs before they shift on low and middle. The current i7 chips are absolute monster performers. Intel hit that one out of the park and into one in another city.
On second thought, they are (effectively) eight core chips and they're perfectly suited to A/V work, so Apple may shift sooner than later. It'd also give them a new chance to gouge on RAM prices, re:
"buy with stock RAM and buy it after market."
If you buy extra RAM from Apple you might as well dump a sack of cash in the oven while sticking a fork in an electrical socket. The markup is dizzying.
Jay Jun 10th 2009 11:12AM
When do rare mobs in vanilla WoW respawn?
Do they respawn at the same time every day?
Do they respawn after a server restart?
Are there any exceptionally oddball rare mobs (say, once every 4 days)?
Josin Jun 10th 2009 11:21AM
It varies from mob to mob. Some are more rare than others. I believe some are on a once per week respawn, but I'm not sure. It's been a long time since I worried about that.
Jay Jun 10th 2009 11:55AM
I was leveling a Shaman alt and was looking for good weapons to pick up as I level. One of them drops off of a rare mob in Alterac Mountains, and I was curious as to how likely I was to find the rare mob, or how much camping I'd have to do to kill him on my main.
Josin Jun 10th 2009 12:10PM
I recommend looking him up on wowhead.com. The comments section will usually let you know the respawn timer.
Cyrus Jun 10th 2009 2:03PM
"I was leveling a Shaman alt and was looking for good weapons to pick up as I level. One of them drops off of a rare mob in Alterac Mountains, and I was curious as to how likely I was to find the rare mob, or how much camping I'd have to do to kill him on my main."
Like Josin said, the comments section of wowhead.com is your best bet for this information. However, why worry about it? Generally, you get enough new gear from leveling in level-appropriate content that you don't need to worry about specific upgrades. There are a few exceptions, like defense trinkets from Outland, maybe, since there aren't any trinkets in Northrend with tanking stats before heroic instances. And if you're planning a twink then you need the best at whatever level, of course. For leveling, though, anything you get in Alterac Mountains will be replaced in STV or Dustwallow Marsh.
Letharginator Jun 10th 2009 3:18PM
There is in fact one defense trinket before heroics, seal of the pantheon from normal Loken
http://www.wowhead.com/?item=36993
ash Jun 10th 2009 3:57PM
Yeah, wowhead is probably the best to check. On a personal note I will say that leveling my alts through Azeroth I have found way more rare spawns now that everyone is in Northrend. Even during BC I found a lot more than I usually did. When I leveled my first toon I think ran into one rare mob, as opposed to 4-5+ on my later toons. Just saying that the effort you may need to put in to get a rare spawn might not be as hard as its made out to be on the comments at wowhead.