Skip to Content

WoW Insider has the latest on the Mists of Pandaria!

No Profile Found

BlogComments
WoW13 Comments

Recent Comments:

Raid Rx: Raiding meets Patch 2.4 {WoW}

Mar 27th 2008 2:36PM Try going into your WTF/Account/[Your Account]/[Your Realm]/[Your Character] folder, looking at the layout-cache.txt file, and deleting the entry for "OmenAnchor." (Or the whole file, which'll reset the positions of a lot of stuff.)

That worked for me, though you'll need to do it for each character.

The PvE + PvP instance {WoW}

Jan 19th 2008 3:39PM As possibly the only person ever to have really enjoyed the "PvE race" aspect of AV over the actual PvP element of it, I approve of this idea.

Blood Pact: Changing resilience to weaken DoTs {WoW}

Jul 11th 2007 9:03PM "I argue that each new tier of equipment also doesn't mitigate the damage caused by all of the Frostbolts that don't crit or the 70% of the time that a Rogue isn't critically striking me."

But it does mitigate the average damage that Frostbolts do, both by reducing crit chance and the damage crits do. The fact that some (or most) individual Frostbolts don't have their individual damage reduced isn't relevant. Average DoT damage isn't (or rather wasn't) affected. Over time, as resilience increased on new tiers of arena gear, this would increase the relative power of DoTs.

Imagine if arena gear instead had... say, Shadow Resist, and more and more of it was added with each new season. Sure, some Shadow spells wouldn't get resisted at all and would do full damage. But the average damage done by them would be reduced, and over time the increasing amounts of Shadow Resist would make warlocks and shadow priests weaker and weaker compared to other classes.

The solutions would be to either remove Shadow Resist from arena gear, add new stats that had a similar effect on non-Shadow damage sources, or change Shadow Resist to equally affect all damage types.

Caption This! [Updated] {WoW}

May 28th 2007 11:03AM Furbolgs are the new Alliance race!

Forum post of the day: Are the Naaru evil? {WoW}

Apr 30th 2007 5:22PM If the Naaru are secretly evil or have ulterior motives are what have you, it would be painfully predictable and boring, in my opinion.

At one time maybe powerful, benevolent beings of Pure Good were the boring cliche, but if so that cliche has been so often and so frequently subverted that it's actually novel and refreshing to see a "straight" take on it for once.

Leaked 2.1.0 patch notes? {WoW}

Mar 18th 2007 9:08PM The other bit that gave it away was the addition of craftable mana-restoring water. That's been in every set of fake patch notes I've ever seen.

It's a very good fake, though. Imitates Blizzard's style well, includes everything they've said they would and nothing they said they wouldn't, and has a good amount of minor bug fixes and tweaks.

And I'd certainly be thrilled if those Druid changes were real.

A realistic look at druid tanking {WoW}

Feb 26th 2007 11:39PM "This level of reduction is obviously major for bears attempting to PvP. However, with cat and moonkin damage untouched (and with moonkin armor buffed), druids should still have options for PvPing."

I haven't PvPed seriously since the expansion (too busy leveling and questing), but the concern among druids is that using cat form for anything but an opener in PvP isn't much of an option, as being in it tends to result in swift death against a non-CCed opponent.

No idea how the moonkin armor buff will change Balance PvP, but my instinct is not much.

"(they only have one ability that specifically generates extra threat, and that's lacerate, gained at level 66)."

Maul also generates additional threat, comparable to Heroic Strike according to Blizzard, for the what it's worth.

"if the problem Blizzard was trying to solve was the bear's damage abilities and mitigation abilities in PvP, then an across the board damage reduction would be the way to do it. However, to maintain viable tanking and aggro-holding abilities, some sort of increased threat would need to be added to compensate, and to the best of our knowledge, that didn't make it into this patch."

Oddly enough, despite a lot of players seeming to see this as mainly a PvP-centered nerf, Blizzard's posts seem to suggest that it was indeed intended as a tanking nerf. Which makes it seem unlikely to me that any sort of aggro-boost will go in before hitting live.

Is M'uru faking it? {WoW}

Feb 5th 2007 2:21PM Hypothetically, imagine that the Draenei had warlocks, and the justification for it was that they had captured a lord of the Burning Legion and were stealing its power to use for their own, good ends. Would there be any doubt that - regardless of whether the demon lord originally intended to be captured - its power would ultimately corrupt at least some of the Draenei warlocks?

M'uru may or may not have been intending to be captured, but it would not surprise me if he was allowing the Blood Knights to tap his power, hoping to turn at least some of them back to the Light.

Countdown to Burning Crusade: Day 13 {WoW}

Jan 13th 2007 3:36PM Dum de dum.

Featured Galleries

It came from the Blog: Occupy Orgrimmar
Midsummer Flamefest 2013
Running of the Orphans 2013
World of Warcraft Tattoos
HearthStone Sample Cards
HearthStone Concept Art
Yaks
It came from the Blog: Lunar Lunacy 2013
Art of Blizzard Gallery Opening

 

Joystiq

Massively

Engadget