Talk:Priest builds
From WoWWiki
Contents |
Neutrality
Killing the neutrality tag, as it was added without any additional information. Qii (talk) 20:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- I removed "Don't use this build. He specs in smite and disc priests don't cast gheals or heals." Doesn't look good. Not the right way to be constructive... --Grynd
Clean up
With 3.1.0 on its way I'm going to work hard to clean up this article. I've noticed there is quite a lot of spam in the example talent sections. Unless anyone objects, I will start removing talent examples from players who are not wearing any gear related to their spec). For example there was a talent build posted by a level 64 priest. Another posted a raiding spec but was only wearing a few epics from heroics etc. It's not a failproof system, but we have to reduce the amount of examples so this will be the temporary criteria / requirements until we establish a workable one later. Mkdwtalk 21:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- I fixed the shadow pve raid build to match what I've found the best so far in Ulduar. I removed the old solo/BG build as I really don't see a way to get silence and all other useful things after 3.1 changes. If someone finds a way to do it feel free to add. As for bad builds, I'd say most of the hybrids should either be majorly changed or just removed, all but the first one simply don't make any sense to me. Hohounknown (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, some of these specs aren't really viable and a few talents don't make sense. The whole thing needs a clean up. I edited the levelling specs. The spec/description didn't say the same thing for the first, broken link for the 2nd. --Grynd (talk) 16:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- Due to the wealth of information provided with the discipline builds, I condensed it into it's own 'Tips on playing Discipline' section. This is imo a nice brief introduction to playing the specs listed below it. If anyone could contribute some tips to holy and shadow for lvl 80 players/raiders I think that would be great. Cleaned up all the spec descriptions. --Grynd (talk) 06:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, some of these specs aren't really viable and a few talents don't make sense. The whole thing needs a clean up. I edited the levelling specs. The spec/description didn't say the same thing for the first, broken link for the 2nd. --Grynd (talk) 16:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Some changes
I changed the description on shadow-spirit build as it was very misleading and contained wrong information. I also added a link to shadowpriest.com. I hope I didn't overstep any boundaries when I did that :) --Hohounknown (talk) 12:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Proposition: Removing Bad Builds
I'm a strong proponent of original/non cookie-cutter builds, but quite a few builds posted up a poor builds in and of themselves. For example, the "Flash Holy Raiding Build (11/60/0)" build is a poor choice, even post-3.1, due to lack of Inner Focus (mana efficiency) and 3/3 Meditation (mana regen). On top of that, it has the talent "Healing Focus", which is widely regarded as a waste of two points thanks to the changes to spell push back. Other talent choices, such as Test of Faith, are situational and are better suited in a build that is exactly that: situational. I have removed all offending/misleading builds, and added a regen-oriented build of my own. ♥sunsmoon talk & cont 18:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Discipline PvE Reworked
Hi! I'm using Deep Discipline Built Priest since Blizz made it to be viable for PvE. I'm old member of the young discipline community at discpriest.com I reworked here many informations that had misleading information about this spec due to patch changes, etc. I'm not confident of my English so I do mainly rework instead of putting brand new text. (Domp (talk) 11:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC))
'Essential Talents' new section?
I like the "Every spec has a few 'essential talents' in every tree." area in Levelling Specs, and I think this would help players who are rolling a priest for the first time. I wonder if this could become it's own section, but I don't know which talents are really indespensible despite the 3 listed plus Spirit of Redemption. Any ideas? --Grynd (talk) 16:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Hybrids and links broken
Due to changes in 3.1, the hybrid talents section links are broken and show incorrect specs. Some of these are no longer applicable (i.e. mana efficient spec's talents change to no longer affect mana regen) and so forth. I deleted the whole section, it doesn't look good atm. If anyone thinks they can do something with these, please do. I have clicked every combination I can think of, yet can't find a hybrid spec that is effective for healing or DPS. Also updated the PvP specs and fixed the broken links. I have done quite a bit of cleaning up on the page. --Grynd (talk) 04:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Removed 57/3/11
I removed the 57/3/11 "Disc Healing/Off-Healing-DPS Build" since the link was to 59/1/11 build. And quite honestly, that build looks a little silly. Regardless, if that (on anything close) was the desired build, please re-add it with the correct talent distribution linked. --Kesshi (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Giving credit
While I don't think it's totally necessary to credit yourself when adding a build, if you feel you must, at least write whether you play on EU or US servers. Grynd (talk) -- 22:13, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Is it just me or has the contributors for all builds been erased? I agree that people should include whether they're US or EU server, but I do consider the contributor signature necessary. I like looking at people's armory if they've posted a spec and checking out their gear, like, this person recommends this for raiding, but do they have any drops from current raids showing that what they recommend works? Bandages (talk) -- 06:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- If the rationale really is to be able to check the spec against something, and not just to give credit, I see several issues:
- Firstly, who has the right to be mentioned? The contributor? Only someone who actually uses the spec? Everyone who is using this spec right now? Those who have used it at least once? In my opinion, anyone who's in favor of promoting the spec should be then.
- Secondly, even with multiple people mentioned I doubt the viability of the spec can be inferred from the armory pages. There's no connection between the spec and the acquired gear/achievements—these could have been obtained with a totally unrelated spec. Unless there's a safe way to link an achievement to a spec (such as: this spec has been used to obtain arena rank #1), one can only judge the build by its promoter; however, if a a brilliant spec is submitted by a player with an awkward armory entry, does it devalue the spec? --Bfx (talk) 18:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- I was referring specifically to the contributors of the spec. Perhaps I was naive in assuming that if someone was submitting a spec (and in my mind, by submitting it, also recommending it) that it would be their preferred, main spec. I've always liked to check out contributor's armory pages, see if they're using what they post, and, by leap of faith, see if it's working for them based on gear and achievements. I know it's not a flawless checks and balance system and requires a little faith on the part of both the contributor and the reader, but I think it's better than nothing. At the VERY least, you have a person you can trace it to, and a means to get in contact with them to ask them about it should you be so inclined. Bandages (talk) -- 06:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- One of the patches broke most of the specs here (some of which were credited), so after fixing them I removed credit... since it no longer applied. The only remaining credits were for Bandages' and Indianman's specs, which didn't state US/EU servers. And as Bfx said... who deserves the credit? Everyone who is using a cookie-cutter spec could add their name underneath it. Also a player's gear and accomplishments don't dictate whether a spec is good or not... --Grynd (talk) 21:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Ulduar raid healer build
The :Ulduar raid healer build (13/58/0) is very interesting! But I wonder why Inner Focus was not taken. Inner Focus used with Divine Hymn, or other AoE spells is very potent. Any thoughts? --Grynd (talk) 17:39, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
- I choose not to take Inner Focus because I find myself, more often than not, forgetting to use the spell. I do think though it could be used in a variation of my build with something like ::Build variation 1 or maybe even ::Build variation 2. It was more a personal preference rather than a question of the usefulness/effectiveness of Inner Focus. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trov (talk · contr).
