The Queue: The new standard
by Adam Holisky 
Dec 30th 2009 at 3:00PM
That's a picture of my hunter above. She can use some better gear, and hopefully this weekend it'll be her turn to get decked out in tier 9. It's just so easy and fun. Plus I really like the idea of all my 80's having their tier 9 shoulders to look at on the loading screen. That's not strange, is it?
Saberix asked...
"Is tier 9 gear the new standard in gear? Am I going to be teased if I don't have it?"
While I think the answer deserves at least an article or two written about it, I'd say yes, tier 9 has developed into the new standard of gear upon which everyone is judged off of. I know that from a mechanical perspective tier 9 is far from necessary to run everything but Icecrown Citadel, and is most certainly not necessary for heroics. Yet when I go into a heroic and see a tank with less than 40,000 HP, part of me sighs and wishes for a new one, even though a 30,000 HP tank is going to do just fine.
The standard is irrational, and doesn't really do WoW any good. But nonetheless, it's something people have to deal with. One way to deal with it is to get your tier 9 shoulders as quickly as possible, those 30 badges are pretty easy to obtain. Once you've gotten them people will just look at you briefly and say "oh, tier 9 shoulders, good to go." Of course if they're using something like gear score (which is equally ridiculous as any tier 9 standard), then they might see otherwise.
The other thing to remember is that when people complain, just ignore them. If you're doing 1500 DPS in a heroic, then you're ready for the heroic. If you're not, then take a look at your rotation and spend some time on the practice dummy. If you still can't hit 1500 DPS, take a look at your gear and see what's missing. I've been able to pull 1500 DPS using level 70 Black Temple / Sunwell / Archimonde gear, so it's not too hard to hit. If you do need some gear, check the AH for a couple BoE level 80 blues and epics, and don't forget to roll need on any blues from heroics that can help you. Then when people complain that you're not in tier 9, you can just say "Since when do heroics require more than 1500 DPS?"
People will usually stop complaining after that.
Finally, remember too that this won't be an issue in six months or so when Cataclysm is out.
Averrex asked...
"What's the defense cap?"
Defense has a soft cap of 540. It's "soft" because defense still is useful after 540, just not an absolute necessary. If you don't have 540 defense though, you'll get yourself crit by raid boss mobs, and that's no fun. It's pretty easy to get these days with tier 9 gear, so it shouldn't be as big of an issues as it once was. The defense soft cap really don't apply for druids either, since they're talented into being uncritable.
Logan asked...
"When is Cataclysm going to release? Do you have any leaks?"
We know that Cataclysm is going to release in 2010, but not any specific time-frame therein. In other words, we do not know an exact date. Sites like Amazon are not listing the correct date, the just list something so they can get you to pre-order the game. When the release date is finally leaked or announced, trust me, you'll hear it here right away.
Have questions about the World of Warcraft? The WoW.com crew is here with The Queue, our daily Q&A column! Leave your questions in the comments and we'll do our best to answer 'em!Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Blizzard, The Queue, Cataclysm
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 8)
Braundo Dec 30th 2009 3:07PM
540 isn't really accurately termed a "cap", it's more of a "minimum". "Cap" implies that you received diminished benefit from the stat past a certain point -- when in reality you continue to receive additional dodge, parry, block (if applicable), and chance to be missed.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y149/videshsawh/HawtAlma/1_notacap.jpg
Adam Holisky Dec 30th 2009 3:10PM
While I agree with you from a linguistical perspective, from a community perspective, it's not an argument you or I will ever win. When someone asks about the defense cap, we just say "540" and maybe include a bit about how it's a soft cap and not a hard cap.
Either way, the most important thing is that people understand that 540 is what they absolutely must hit. The number of tanks that run around with less than that and think it's okay amazes me.
Mordockk Dec 30th 2009 3:14PM
540 to not get crit by a raid boss. and 535 to not get crit by a boss in a heroic dungeon...right?
Quidamtyra Dec 30th 2009 3:22PM
@Mordockk
yes, you are correct, 535 is the "cap" vs level 80s (heroics bosses), while 540 is the "cap" vs level 83s (raid bosses).
Quidamtyra Dec 30th 2009 3:23PM
and by level 80s, I mean level 82s -.-
wtb edit button
Nick S Dec 30th 2009 4:13PM
I love how often PuGs tell me I'm under the defense cap when I wear 536 in a heroic.
Bob Dewane Dec 30th 2009 4:29PM
Keep in mind that most tanks will go with the 30stam/15 resil pvp shouldr chant in order to stack stam. The resiliance lets you drop down to 536 and still be uncrittable. It seems that NO ONE except other tanks understands this. Example:
Player X: "What's your def rating?"
Tank: "536, but because of my 15 resiliance I'm not crittable."
Player X: "Whatever n00b! Everyone knows def cap is 540. L2P FFS!"
Tank: "I KNOW how to play my class. I'm not crittable."
...
Tank: "Hello?"
Player X is ignoring you.
/sigh Such is the plight of the tank.
Netheral Dec 30th 2009 5:22PM
@Bob, you do know that resilience only effects players right?
Docp Dec 30th 2009 5:29PM
Actually the crit reduction component works on PVE mobs as well as PVP mobs and is a perfectly valid method of becoming uncrittable.
Chris Anthony Dec 30th 2009 5:36PM
@Netheral, I can't decide whether or not you're trolling, so I'll assume you're not: no, it doesn't only affect players. Resilience reduces the critical strike chance of any incoming attack, PVP or PVE. When it was initially introduced, it wasn't considered as good as Defense because it didn't mitigate crushing blows. Now that crushing blows have functionally been removed from the endgame, resilience is considered a viable, if odd, replacement for some of a tank's Defense.
Netheral Dec 30th 2009 5:38PM
Huh, did not know that. Always thought that resi and def were separate by the fact that resi only affected players. Oh well, you learn something new every day I guess. :p
Snuzzle Dec 30th 2009 6:22PM
They originally intended to make resilience not work in dungeons on account of many druid tanks were stacking PvP gear in dungeons instead of the PvE def leather. But I guess they couldn't find a way to make it work without breaking the stat, or they just abandoned it because druids don't need either anymore.
mhm Dec 30th 2009 7:49PM
druids have never really needed defense because it came from armor increasing talents
JKWood Dec 30th 2009 10:00PM
I don't see what your problem is, Braundo. After all, after 540 defense, you DO receive diminished benefits - you can't possibly become any more uncrittable than you can with 540 defense, at least not effectively (yes, I suppose additional defense would help to keep you from being critted by mobs that don't exist).
Bartuk Dec 31st 2009 12:04AM
@mhm
BC tanking druids used resilence to be uncrittable because the original talent only avoided 3% crit, not the actual 6% and there was a lack of leather with defense rating (hello clefthoof set! http://www.wowhead.com/?itemset=574 )
Tom Dec 31st 2009 1:27AM
Keep in mind that the Defense Skill (540) is rounded. You need a Defense *Rating* of 689 to be crit-immune for raids - if your rating is 688 you'll see a skill of 540 but can still be critically hit.
tutti Dec 31st 2009 2:36PM
Not quite. You DO need 689 defense rating to be crit immune, but it's the defense stat (not the rating) that decides whether you're immune to crits, and you do need 689 to reach 540 - with 688, you're at 539.
This is, of course, assuming 0 resilience.
Joshua Ochs Dec 30th 2009 3:08PM
Let's see...
1) WoW was released in November, 2004
2) The Burning Crusade was released in January, 2007... after being delayed a couple months from... November, 2006. Go ahead, Google it.
3) Wrath of the Lich King was released in November, 2008.
It's almost like there was some significance to it, some strategy, as if there was some other nearby driving force to spend money on an expansion or video game - maybe even spend on someone else - that Blizzard would like to take advantage of.
Pretty obvious here that given the lack of even an alpha yet, "six months or so" is a silly estimate to throw out. Cataclysm is going to be November, 2010. Mark my words.
RetadinMan Dec 30th 2009 3:15PM
Alphas aren't announced, as they are private. What we saw at Blizzcon was probably an early form of the alpha.
It has also been in development since before WotLK was released, so it should roll out around the 2nd quarter of 2010.
Ringo Flinthammer Dec 30th 2009 3:16PM
No, Joshua, The Burning Crusade never did have that earlier release date. The fact that EBGames announced a date was just a naked attempt to soak people for pre-orders. It's been year since Blizzard announced a release date that they missed, simply because they're no longer dumb enough to announce a release date until they're about to ship off the gold masters to the DVD replication factory.
And if you're going to try playing the "Blizzard wants Christmas sales" game, you need to include their other games, including Diablo 1, which was guaranteed to fail when it shipped right after Christmas ...