Skip to Content
10-26-2011 @ 1:56PM
On your section on auto-attack, you didn't address one point:What's keeping Blizzard from scraping auto-attack completely for all classes and have, say, rogue special attacks and death knight strikes hit super-hard? I still don't get why auto-attack is NECESSARY for melee. If it's to make sure procs proc, then they can make it a chance proc off special attacks, much like how nature grace and clearcasting is.
10-26-2011 @ 3:25PM
For a non-gameplay reason, it's so classes that favor slow weapons (whether for flavor or gameplay reasons) like DKs, Arms Warriors, or Ret Paladins are more visually interesting in combat.If you're just standing around doing nothing while you wait for your real attack to come off cooldown, that's pretty boring.
10-26-2011 @ 4:20PM
As the poster above me notes 'standing around doing nothing'...The animations for the weapon classes are triggered around auto-attack.The Monk -is- going to end up 'standing there' if the player ain't smacking the keyboard - but its going to be animated so this looks normal.(Unlike say, my tauren warrior, that just stands there with her sword and shield at her sides if I stop using auto-attack.)
10-26-2011 @ 7:55PM
I'm loving the idea of removing the mixture of autoswing+instants and I'm keen to play a monk and try that sout. Meanwhile, I'd love to see them try the opposite idea with warriors and ditch instant attacks and convert everything to on-next-swing. I don't play Fury, so I haven't really thought through how dual wielding would work under this model, but I think Arms in particular would be pretty cool with thunderous two-handed smashes on the swing timer instead of mediocre white hits on the swing timer and bigger yellow hits just popping in out of nowhere every GCD, which always irked me. If your weapon's so chunky that it takes you 3½ seconds after a swing to get it lined up for another swing, how the hell are you also landing a full-force hit with it every 1½ seconds?Also, there's an Arms Warrior in my raid team who is pretty close behind our Arcane Mage for damage, but the Warrior can only hit hard enough to interrupt Rageface's Face Rage if Mortal Srike crits while he's got Colossus Smash up, while the Mage hits hard enough to interrupt it with most of his Arcane Blasts. The warrior damage output is smeared across too many puny hits for a Warrior to be able to useful against mechanics like Face Rage. 2H weapons have swing timers comparable to Fireball cast times, so if the damage was only happening on the swing timer then we'd see Fireball-sized Warrior attacks.I did briefly ponder how this idea would work for Prot (as it's my main spec), and it seems like it would be OK. We can have Devastate, Revenge, and Rend on the swing timer, while Shield Slam would be an off-swing-timer instant attack (with its own cooldown, like it already has) because it doesn't actually use the weapon. I suppose Thunderclap, Shockwave, shouts and the like would also be non-swing instant attacks, again with their own cooldowns. Perhaps using the non-swing-timer instant attacks would slightly delay the swing timer so that there's still a time cost in using them.
10-26-2011 @ 11:27PM
You can't get rid of auto-attacks. That's how warriors and bears build their rage. Also, there will be times where you burn all your rage/combos/runics/runes/etc, and everything else is on CD. It'd look pretty stupid for a melee to just stand there with nothing to do for a few seconds until the next skill comes up.
10-27-2011 @ 2:35AM
"You can't get rid of auto-attacks. That's how warriors and bears build their rage."This is true for DPS warriors (bears and tanking warriors get most of their rage from being attacked rather than attacking) *under the current system,* but obviously changing the attack mechanics of warriors would require significant changes to the resource system that the attack mechanics are tied to.The current rage system is pretty clumsy and hasn't changed much since Vanilla except for normalization when the scaling issues got too far out of control. With Blizzard's experimentation with the Barbarian's "Fury" resource (which started out as a copy of WoW's rage) in the Diablo 3 beta, it wouldn't be too big a stretch for the rage resource system to see a chunky revamp in 5.0 based on what they learned through the D3 beta.Last time I read up on Barbarians, the deal was that ALL damage done (even by special abilities) generates Fury, so clever ability selection allows you to get good momentum and keep it while bad choices will dump you back to an empty bar. Basic (white) swings will always give rage, combo-builder-like attacks will have low enough rage costs that they still build rage, and the big finishers will have high costs. There'll be tactical combos along the lines of using Colossus Smash before a Mortal Strike so that Mortal Strike will hit hard enough to be rage-efficient, plus there'll be situation-dependent stuff like whirlwind's damage-per-enemy making it horrible on single targets but great on packs (because you generate extra rage per enemy hit).I can see the D3 Fury model having the same out-of-control scaling as WoW's Rage used to, because basing rage on how hard you hit means that at some gear level you'll hit hard enough that you generate more rage than you can spend. I'm sure there are ways to normalize it, though. They could have abilities cost a portion of max rage but have the max rage scale with AP instead of being the static 100. They could make it generate rage based on how many swings' worth of damage you do (ie, if your character sheet says you swing for 6k, a 9k hit is "1.5 swings"). They could give each attack a set cost with a set return per target hit (ie, whirlwind costs 50 rage and generates 10 rage per target hit) and maybe throw in some "reduces the rage cost of the next X attacks by Y%" effects on some of the other abilities to allow good combo-buildups.So anyway, there are heaps of ways to rebuild the resource system to match a rebuilt attack model. I'm not too unhappy with how it works now either but I think it's worth considering other models that might lead to more interesting or even just more intuitive play.
10-27-2011 @ 2:56AM
They aren't going to remove autoattacks. In fact, Monks are likely to ship with them. They already said it was extremely controversial around the office, and it might not end up like that in the final version.And who the hell wants Hunters to have to click fire for EVERY attack? No one. If you want to replicate that now, get on a Rogue or Warrior. Equip a throwing knife. Find a target dummy. Use throw. Now, attack the dummy for half an hour. That's what a Hunter without autoattack would feel like.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.