Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Warlock builds

101,284pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Revision as of 07:18, August 8, 2009 by Onorvele (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


Past discussions archived to...

Errors Edit

List factual errors in the article here. Remove them once you fix the error.

  • The SL-SL with Nether Protection Affliction (25/17/29) build mentions Dark Pact when the build linked to does not have that spell enabled (25 pts in Affliction isn't enough for DP). Yggdrsil (talk) 07:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I've been looking at that build and I think it needs a look over by someone more into pvp. It was originally 32/11/28, but was changed. Personally I think swapping Shadow Mastery & Dark Pact for Demonic Aegis, Fel Dom & Master Summoner was a bad idea, but I have little arena experience. Binkyuk (talk) 13:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Level 80 BuildsEdit

As a general rule I'd expect builds to be at least tried out before being posted, both for level 70 and level 80 builds. If you're in the beta and have made a level 80 warlock with this spec then fair enough (this is unlikely though as I believe the level cap is currently 77). If it's based on an official external source then great, link to it. If it's based purely on twiddling buttons in a talent builder then I greatly question its value. Binkyuk (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I was foolish to think I could stand in the way of the armchair spec experts, so I created a page for level 80 builds similar to the level 60 builds page, and moved all level 80 builds posted so far into it. Hopefully come the expansion we'll have a complete page of level 80 builds and we'll just have to shuffle the redirects around to make it current. Binkyuk (talk) 11:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I plan on cleaning up this page: remove double builds, remove terrible builds, adapt builds on the page to achieve the best results in game. I will only concentrate on the PvE builds since I don't PvP that much. Marmion (talk) 12:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Everything I write on the page has been tested in game, please contact me via mail if you think something is wrong. Marmion (talk) 13:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Most of the builds need to be updated or deleted with the changes to the trees in 3.1. The other way to go about it, I suppose, would be to define what each talent (or just important ones) is typically used for at the top/top of each tree, on another page (there seems to be some guides on here), or at the talent's own page. Rei-gouki (talk) 15:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Good thoughts. All 3.0.* builds should be moved to a new "Older Builds" page, even though the talent links will no longer work. I don't know that each build will be able to have a set of talents that define it - more that each strong build will have defining philosophies behind it. For example, compare the "Demonic pact/Devastation 3.1 build" and my "Deep Demonology Raid Buffing" - I feel that Metamorphosis is most definitely worth it in PvE/Raiding, while the author of the first doesn't.Onorvele (talk) 23:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, This PvP Destro (0/20/51) part of your article has a Blizzard link which is most likely obsolete by syntax. Though it seems to contain a warlock talent tree, it opens a level 61 death knight tree in the talent calculator - 0/17/35. http://www.wowarmory.com/talent-calc.xml?c=warlock&tal=000000000000000000000000000020320033113020000000000000005230015220331351005031051 In some time point there seem to have been a change in the blizzard talent calculator syntax so that older blizzard trees don't anymore import to wowhead current talent calculator. Though a "warlock" link that open a dk tree is very strange.. BR MR

You're right - the "c" parameter for Class looks to have been replaced with a "cid" parameter for "Class ID". I've updated link from "c=warlock" to "cid=9". Seems to have fixed it for now. Onorvele (talk) 20:15, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

As of the latest build, this site contains a lot of errors (like using life tap to refresh the buff with glyph every 20 sec even if you don't need the mana) and some horrible, horrible builds like Fire Raiding Destro w/ support (3/6/59 +3) that uses shadowbolt as a main nuke. Please, only post builds that are really thought through and have been tested. Marmion (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm curious about your comment that seems to indicate you would not cast Life Tap to refresh the glyph buff if your mana was full. Is this because of the GCD cost? I mean, I agree there are cases when you should not cast life tap at all, but this would be whether you needed mana or not. Onorvele (talk) 20:33, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
You should not cast life tap only to refresh the buff you get from the glyph. The buff you gain is too weak to make up for the time you lose by casting life tap. See http://elitistjerks.com/f80/t37900-dots_you_affliction_warlock_thread/#Glyph_of_Life_Tap for further explanation. Marmion (talk) 07:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Due to the buff duration increase to 40 sec with the 3.2.0 release, the advice at this link looks to have come in line with the recommendation here. Life Tap whenever the buff drops. Onorvele (talk) 07:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Build TemplateEdit

Should you wish to use this, do something like this:

{{single build
|name=Build Name
|numbers=0/21/40 (or whatever)
|purpose=Snappy summary of purpose (e.g Raiding, Soloing, Heroic CC, Arena)
|blizztalents=http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/classes/warlock/talents.html?tal=000
|wowheadtalents=http://www.wowhead.com/?talent=I
|mmochamptalents=http://talent.mmo-champion.com/?warlock=
|tested=3.0.8 (if you've actually tested it!)
}}

All fields except name are optional. You can have one or both (or neither) talent links.


To get a bit cleverer, add:

|anchor=BuildName

And it'll embed a link anchor in it, which you can then use to link to it from somewhere else on the page with:

[[#BuildName|Build Name or some other text for the link]]

Even if it doesn't look the greatest hopefully it'll give some uniformity of style. In particular I'm hoping it'll make people think a bit about the purpose of their build and testing it. Binkyuk (talk) 14:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Note that by using <h3>, the build name is auto-included in the TOC, which means there is a default anchor of Build Name (numbers) (as provided in the name and numbers parameters, which makes the anchor param only necessary for making the anchor more friendly. Onorvele (talk) 08:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Destro Build for Discussion Edit

I've been using a (3/13/55) build designed to maximize a Warlock's personal damage without relying on demons, and have made it to reduce time spent lifetapping.

Spec is: http://www.wowhead.com/?talent#IcZbG0h0hZVdhVrcuVsAf0t:zq0

Rotation: Immolate - Incinerate (Until 5 seconds remain on Immolate) - Chaos Bolt - Conflagrate

These Warlocks usually want to open with Curse of Elements not only to boost their own DPS, but to allow Affliction Warlocks to use their other curses and help Raid DPS in general.

Life Tap can be added at the end for Warlocks who want Life Tap proc'd buffs or need to continually supplement their mana, though the build is meant to help stop the "mana bleeding" most direct damage builds feel, and thus avoid downtime spent lifetapping.

I've left it here for discussion rather than adding it directly to the page. I've experienced that I'm usually very high on the DPS charts if not at the top. A warning, that threat generated will be ridiculously high and that anything that can bleed away threat generated by spells in addition to the spec's design will be extremely useful.

Edited for clarity. Erubadhron (talk) 16:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Similar to the very popular Imp Supported Destro build, you've moved the points that would support the Imp (Improved Imp, Demonic Power, Empowered Imp) for talents that improve your survivability. These changes do reduce your potential for crits (I don't know how important the +20% crit resulting from Empowered Imp is), and reduce your combined overall DPS (the Imp is missing 45% damage boost from bonuses, and is taking 33% longer to cast it's attack).
There's a few factors to take into account - how often your Imp dies, how fast it runs out of mana, the average duration of your fights, that type of thing. Good looking build. Onorvele (talk) 20:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Quite, but the point is to totally the negate the need of any and all Demons, as their potential for death mid-raid will likely result in the collapse of the Warlock's DPS while resulting in a follow-up lack of survivability. The Imp isn't supposed to attack at all, and provide only the Blood Pact bonus if it is even used, what with the idea that other Warlocks may be in the Raid as well. Still, it's worth noting that you're losing the chance of the chance of critting for the chance of restoring your health and mana to keep yourself pumping DPS faster, longer. Erubadhron (talk) 00:15, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Ran the numbers a bit for a one minute fight. Without the Imp attacking, both builds will do the same DPS with my current gear. With the Imp attacking, the Imp centric build has an extra 120 theoretical DPS over the non-Imp build (40 extra from the warlock, and 80 extra from the Imp). Mind you, having the Imp attacking only provides a boost of 200-300 DPS (so your damage output won't tank if it dies). I'm having trouble running the math about mana expiry for longer fights.
Overall, I'd say yours is a solid build - eking out a bit more survivability than is expected from traditional destro builds. If you were raiding in my guild, I would suggest that you looked at moving the points to buff the Imp - but that's 'cause I really trust our heals, and we've usually got lots of mana regen going on. Throw it on the main page! Onorvele (talk) 03:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Remove OOD Tag Edit

I suggest the Out Of Date flag be removed from the Warlock builds page, due to the fact that all builds refer to 3.1 or later. We can re-add when 3.2 comes out. Onorvele (talk) 00:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki