Buff Target Preference

[Magpie1]

<p>I have recently started playing my illusionist on raids and I have been wondering what the preferences are for the targets of my various buffs.</p><p>Haste - to me this should go onto a class with multiple fast attacks as a priority so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger</p><p>Illusionary Arm - again onto a class with multiple fast attacks so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger</p><p>Time Compression - I read elsewhere that the Ranger is the best target for this followed by either socerer class. Is there a good reason for this?</p><p>The above assumes that the target is outputting decent dps anyway and if not the buff needs to go onto the next class in line that is producing high dps.</p><p>Is my thinking here correct or are there other factors that are important to bare in mind? Also, is my understanding of relative attack speed of the classes mentioned above correct?</p><p>Thanks for any tip or pointers.</p>

[Mongowth]

Kinda depends on your overall setup tbh. Haste - to me this should go onto a class with multiple fast attacks as a priority so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger <i>This in my mind at least, depends on what their haste is already at... if it's already near capped then putting more haste on them is going to do not much of anything whereas finding someone with less haste would be much more beneficial. </i>Illusionary Arm - again onto a class with multiple fast attacks so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger <i>Again, I tend to ask what they're already at... I think most, if not all the classes you've mentioned can achieve the same if not higher chance by AAs. If they already have a chance to double attack then maybe spread it out a bit (spread the hate gain kinda thing) </i>Time Compression - I read elsewhere that the Ranger is the best target for this followed by either socerer class. Is there a good reason for this? <i>Long cast times pretty much sums up the reason why. Temp/Inq, sorcerers all seem to have longer time casts (forgive if I've forgotten others, those are what I'm aware of). Depends on overall raid setup which to go for. If you're low on healers then on a healer may be more beneficial or if you're cool and just want more dps then drag a sorcerer into the group <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </i>Not entirely sure if I have it right myself but I try to distribute the dps so not to cause too much hate gain on any one person in the raid force. Hope it helps... if not. Oh well, can't win 'em all <img src="/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[auk]

Heldark@Splitpaw wrote: <blockquote><p>I have recently started playing my illusionist on raids and I have been wondering what the preferences are for the targets of my various buffs.</p><p>Haste - to me this should go onto a class with multiple fast attacks as a priority so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger</p><p><span style="color: #ff3333">There are a couple of considerations to take into account here: 1. The amount of self-buffed haste a class has already. This puts swashes, rangers and monks at lower priority than brigand, assassin, bruiser. 2. Time spent auto-attacking versus casting. Unless they are using an insanely high delay weapon, bards and crusaders won't get as much benefit from haste. Similarly, classes that can spam their CAs without having to wait very long on reuse timers won't get as much benefit either. They will just "miss" more autoattacks. Again, more useful for assassins, brigands and bruisers. 3. A class's dependence on procs. A class or character that gets a lot of DPS from procs will proc more often with high haste. </span></p><p>Illusionary Arm - again onto a class with multiple fast attacks so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger</p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">More like ranger > assassin >= rogue (depending on rogue's AAs). Ranger gets a double whammy with IA because it is ranged AND melee double attack, and a good ranger will be doing a mix of both. Assassins do a lot of autoattack damage, which is all that double attack affects. Rogues typically use a 1 hander with double attack AAs, so the 25% increase is less dramatic. A dual-wield specced rogue will probably benefit about the same as an assassin though.</span> </p><p>Time Compression - I read elsewhere that the Ranger is the best target for this followed by either socerer class. Is there a good reason for this?</p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">I've never looked at using this for a ranger and not sure what the advantage would be. I'll put it on a wizard first, warlock second.</span> </p><p>The above assumes that the target is outputting decent dps anyway and if not the buff needs to go onto the next class in line that is producing high dps.</p><p>Is my thinking here correct or are there other factors that are important to bare in mind? Also, is my understanding of relative attack speed of the classes mentioned above correct?</p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">See above. Keep in mind that both IA and Haste only affect auto-attacks.</span> </p><p>Thanks for any tip or pointers.</p></blockquote>

[Controlor]

Heldark@Splitpaw wrote: <blockquote><p>I have recently started playing my illusionist on raids and I have been wondering what the preferences are for the targets of my various buffs.</p><p>Haste - to me this should go onto a class with multiple fast attacks as a priority so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger</p><p><span style="color: #00ff00">This depends also on what group your in. I am normally in the OT group on raids, occasionally MT group (because i am only chanter who is reliable on raids). So i am limited to option of hate transfer or tank or both (generally throw on both). For non MT/OT group i would go with others have said those who do more auto attack dmg and/or are farther from haste cap. </span></p><p>Illusionary Arm - again onto a class with multiple fast attacks so swashy/brigand > assasin > ranger</p><p><span style="color: #00ff00">Again as an OT illy i throw it on the hate transfer (i feel higher double attack = more hate transfered because the tank would be stuned a lot of the time to not benefit as much). But i would throw it on a Ranger over a brig / swashy any day. Because of the range double attack chance and most rangers stay ranged. This also is important with jousting mobs. Ranger can stay at max range and dont have to joust as much and can benefit much more from double attack for this.</span> </p><p>Time Compression - I read elsewhere that the Ranger is the best target for this followed by either socerer class. Is there a good reason for this?</p><p><span style="color: #00ff00">Time compression does not work on scouts. I have tried with my assassin friend i occasionally duo with. His CA's dont reduce in time casted and hte recast doesnt get effected either. So Time compression really is for healer / sorc. (or crusader). Our MT is a sk so i throw it on him because his taunt is a spell. But if your in a scout only group throw it on a healer. If your in caster group throw it on a wiz / warlock. And to my knowledge Shamans have the longest casting wards/heals so if you choose a healer i would go with that then priest then druid. (druids are the fast cast healers already)</span> </p><p>The above assumes that the target is outputting decent dps anyway and if not the buff needs to go onto the next class in line that is producing high dps.</p><p>Is my thinking here correct or are there other factors that are important to bare in mind? Also, is my understanding of relative attack speed of the classes mentioned above correct?</p><p>Thanks for any tip or pointers.</p></blockquote>

[Anca0202]

<p>Just put it all on the Sk hee hee.</p><p> Although that would work it would not be too effecive at overall raid wide dps it would be fun to see how the SK would parse with IA, Synergism, TC and Haste.  But usually I hit up melee in group with haste casters with agro issues get Synergism.  TC goes to a sorcerer unless it is a tough fight then a healer gets it, although healers with tc tend to run out of power much faster.  IA goes to a ranger usually and if not some other melee class.  This is all dependent on group setup of course.</p>

[Pins]

Illusory Arm should go on a person who does the most auto-attack damage.  Which is, Rangers, Rogues are 2nd, Assassins are last. Time Compression, Sorceror, Summoner, Bard, Crusader, Priest in that order.

[Antryg Mistrose]

Synergism isn't a deagro on a mage btw - on raid debuffed mobs from a caster with decent INT it hits on average for 1-200 MORE than it deaggroes.  That its NOT a deaggro and also that they don't proc it enough is a reason for not casting it on sorcerers in my experience.  Best use is on a class that has some sort of spell haste.  Enchanters, & Conjurors for example.  Works well on Troubadors and SKs too.  SK's don't get the deaggro so its a must if they are tanking.  Troubadors provide YOU with so many buffs that if you are grouped with them its just polite<img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> (from raid parses my troubador gets decent damage from it - almost as much as a real mage, who will have higher Int). Haste as others have said depends on how much the chars have already due to the diminishing returns, and how slow their weapon is compared to their spells/combat arts (You can at least inspect that so don't have to take their word for it - everyone wants every buff of course) IA I normally put on someone I don't haste, unless there is good deaggro in the raid/group Time Compression - if you are in a really tough fight then on the priest (wouldn't bother with a druid, they'll just use it to speed up their nukes) When I dual box SK/Illusionist, I put all buffs on the SK (don't have TC yet), but with more in the group, haste is the first to drop.

[anaphaxeton]

I'm not sure that I believe Synergism accrues more hate than it relieves. Upgrades to the spell widen both the damage range and the range of threat, but upgrades seem to increase the threat loss more than the damage. Also, when soloing I drop Aspect of Lucidity and put a Synergism on myself, that way if both me and my personae's roots break, whatever I'm fighting usually goes for my personae first. Also my regular groupmates include a wizard and a brigand who acts as the tank, and when I put a synergism on the wizard the brigand can actually keep aggro. Basically I think that 400-550ish damage is on a different scale than 650-800ish threat. (Wish I had exact numbers, but I'm not logged in right now.) It is actually a very handy aggro control spell that just happens to have a damage proc as an added bonus.

[Antryg Mistrose]

<cite>anaphaxeton wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm not sure that I believe Synergism accrues more hate than it relieves. Upgrades to the spell widen both the damage range and the range of threat, but upgrades seem to increase the threat loss more than the damage. Also, when soloing I drop Aspect of Lucidity and put a Synergism on myself, that way if both me and my personae's roots break, whatever I'm fighting usually goes for my personae first. Also my regular groupmates include a wizard and a brigand who acts as the tank, and when I put a synergism on the wizard the brigand can actually keep aggro. Basically I think that 400-550ish damage is on a different scale than 650-800ish threat. (Wish I had exact numbers, but I'm not logged in right now.) It is actually a very handy aggro control spell that just happens to have a damage proc as an added bonus. </blockquote>Hate is somewhat invisible.  I am going from the actual, logged spell damage vs the claimed (invarient) deaggro. The parses that I base this data on are from Master 1 & 2 qualities of the spell proccing on raid mobs.  In that situation it is 100% NOT a deaggro. Outside raids and/or with less debuffs in place and/or with recipients with less Int, it can be.  e.g. Duoing with my SK in defensive stance, the SK hits for less than what the deaggro would be (if he wasn't a fighter).  This is because there are limited debuffs and the SK has comparatively low int.

[Phineus]

<p> I cross raid synergism our aggro [Removed for Content] and the difference is noticable(sorcerers and warlocks).</p><p> Im thinking of selling haste and illusory arm to the highest bidder /wink. </p><p> I was grouped with a troub that asked for the haste tho and I turned him down. He was quite upset about it. Had a ranger in the group that did 4 times the dps as the troub and felt like a terrible waste. </p><p> Templar cast times are as bad as shamans. I cast it on the templar in the harder zones. Ive played both and the cast times are stoopid in difficult situations. No wonder druids can blast em on heal parses. </p>

[Antryg Mistrose]

Phineus@Venekor wrote: <blockquote><p> I cross raid synergism our aggro [Removed for Content] and the difference is noticable(sorcerers and warlocks).</p><p> Im thinking of selling haste and illusory arm to the highest bidder /wink. </p><p> I was grouped with a troub that asked for the haste tho and I turned him down. He was quite upset about it. Had a ranger in the group that did 4 times the dps as the troub and felt like a terrible waste. </p><p> Templar cast times are as bad as shamans. I cast it on the templar in the harder zones. Ive played both and the cast times are stoopid in difficult situations. No wonder druids can blast em on heal parses. </p></blockquote> 1) I really think you are mistaken about Synergism being a deaggro.  1pt damage = 1pt hate.  The damage scales depending on INT and debuff level of the mob.  There is no reason to think the deaggro scales too, and every reason to believe it doesn't. 2) Templar cast times are generally not as bad as shamans, still slow as molasses and would definetly like the boost, but every templar I've talked to has the got the KoS AA ability to speed them up.  Defilers do not have the same ability, so are no longer equal last, but last all by themselves (Mystics I thought were a bit faster). 3) Heal parses are meaningless, except to show if someone is afk.  wards>reactives>regens in application.  The only places Druids have an advantage is in group healing, and quick cast healing of other than the MT. I do agree that haste on a troubador is a waste of time.  They should have asked for synergism, which would not have been (assuming they cast PotM often and have high INT).

[Methriln]

synergism is a agro free proc.

[Controlor]

Antryg Mistrose wrote: <blockquote>Phineus@Venekor wrote: <blockquote><p> I cross raid synergism our aggro [Removed for Content] and the difference is noticable(sorcerers and warlocks).</p><p> Im thinking of selling haste and illusory arm to the highest bidder /wink. </p><p> I was grouped with a troub that asked for the haste tho and I turned him down. He was quite upset about it. Had a ranger in the group that did 4 times the dps as the troub and felt like a terrible waste. </p><p> Templar cast times are as bad as shamans. I cast it on the templar in the harder zones. Ive played both and the cast times are stoopid in difficult situations. No wonder druids can blast em on heal parses. </p></blockquote> 1) I really think you are mistaken about Synergism being a deaggro.  1pt damage = 1pt hate.  The damage scales depending on INT and debuff level of the mob.  <b>There is no reason to think the deaggro scales too, and every reason to believe it doesn't.</b> 2) Templar cast times are generally not as bad as shamans, still slow as molasses and would definetly like the boost, but every templar I've talked to has the got the KoS AA ability to speed them up.  Defilers do not have the same ability, so are no longer equal last, but last all by themselves (Mystics I thought were a bit faster). 3) Heal parses are meaningless, except to show if someone is afk.  wards>reactives>regens in application.  The only places Druids have an advantage is in group healing, and quick cast healing of other than the MT. I do agree that haste on a troubador is a waste of time.  They should have asked for synergism, which would not have been (assuming they cast PotM often and have high INT). </blockquote>threat / deagro are still uncalculatable really in this game and the devs refuse to give us anything beyond: 1 dmg = 1 hate and 1 heal = .5 hate. For all we know the deagro does scale. Or it could crit as well like any other spell. Since they made fighters have that skill needed for hate (forgot name) who is to say they cant crit taunt. Or who is to say that one buff doesnt help reduce the resistability of hate. So i dont see every reason to see it doesnt. Going by pure numbers of dmg is not way to say the hate is useless. For this it takes personal observation. From what i have seen it does help reduce the agro while adding some dps of people it does not reduce the hate by an extensive amount mind you because the spell dmg on the proc negates part of the deagro. But i have seen it help. Now and days tho the only person i put synergism on is myself cause norm in mt or ot group and have to have other buffs up. But when i was in mage group i had it on the mages and was noticable. (we had a wizard who was notorious for dieing and would take bets to see how long it took him to eat the floor).

[Mihos]

<p>Synergism does nothing for deagro other than cancel out some of its own hate.</p><p>If your sorcerer/wizard thinks its helping with his slow [Removed for Content] spells, its a placebo effect... and he is probably fighting to go up a notch in the parse channel.</p>

[Ardnahoy]

<p>I cast Time Compression on a slow healer first, a warlock second, and a crusader third. Casting it on a wizzy is just asking for a dead wizzy. I refuse to cast it on a summoner unless there are no healers or crusaders or sorcerers in the group.</p><p>Time compression goes to the non-bard scouts first, brawlers second, crusaders third, and any other melee class last (including myself or a conjuror pet). I'm usually in the scout or mage group, but if the secondary tank ends up in my group, I'll toss it on them.</p><p>I ask scouts if they need haste before casting it. Many of my regular guild melee classes are near the haste cap anyway. I'll look for brawlers next. Lastly, if the MA or secondary tank ends up in my group, I'll cast it on them to help with their agro.</p><p>I cast synergism on myself first, warlocks second, wizzies third, crusaders fourth, and conjurors fifth.</p><p>I try to distribute synergism before haste. I'll take away a hasted groupmember to cast a cross-raid synergism with no qualms.</p>

[HippyKnight]

Antryg Mistrose wrote: <blockquote>Phineus@Venekor wrote: <blockquote><p> I cross raid synergism our aggro [Removed for Content] and the difference is noticable(sorcerers and warlocks).</p><p> Im thinking of selling haste and illusory arm to the highest bidder /wink. </p><p> I was grouped with a troub that asked for the haste tho and I turned him down. He was quite upset about it. Had a ranger in the group that did 4 times the dps as the troub and felt like a terrible waste. </p><p> Templar cast times are as bad as shamans. I cast it on the templar in the harder zones. Ive played both and the cast times are stoopid in difficult situations. No wonder druids can blast em on heal parses. </p></blockquote> 1) I really think you are mistaken about Synergism being a deaggro.  1pt damage = 1pt hate.  The damage scales depending on INT and debuff level of the mob.  There is no reason to think the deaggro scales too, and every reason to believe it doesn't. 2) Templar cast times are generally not as bad as shamans, still slow as molasses and would definetly like the boost, but every templar I've talked to has the got the KoS AA ability to speed them up.  Defilers do not have the same ability, so are no longer equal last, but last all by themselves (Mystics I thought were a bit faster). 3) Heal parses are meaningless, except to show if someone is afk.  wards>reactives>regens in application.  The only places Druids have an advantage is in group healing, and quick cast healing of other than the MT. I do agree that haste on a troubador is a waste of time.  They should have asked for synergism, which would not have been (assuming they cast PotM often and have high INT). </blockquote>Yeah 1 dmg = 1 pt of hate but if the target of the spell has passive hate reduction/transfer then synergism should act as a further deaggro. For example, if say your average dynamism proc was for 600dmg and 680 dehate with 40% reduction from a troub and 4% transfer (sorcs) then you are generating 330 hate and losing 680, so a -350 hate per proc. Most of the time a sorceror will pick up some sort of passive deaggro, if not from a troub then moderate, harm link etc.. although these usually arent enough.  Also synergism can proc per target for aoes where +haste wont help as much (except for the % chance to hit multiple targets thing)... Just something to consider.

[Controlor]

Jagone@The Bazaar wrote: <blockquote><p>I cast Time Compression on a slow healer first, a warlock second, and a crusader third. Casting it on a wizzy is just asking for a dead wizzy. I refuse to cast it on a summoner unless there are no healers or crusaders or sorcerers in the group.</p><p><b><span style="color: #009900">Time compression</span> goes to the non-bard scouts first, brawlers second, crusaders third, and any other melee class</b> last (including myself or a conjuror pet). I'm usually in the scout or mage group, but if the secondary tank ends up in my group, I'll toss it on them.</p><p>I ask scouts if they need haste before casting it. Many of my regular guild melee classes are near the haste cap anyway. I'll look for brawlers next. Lastly, if the MA or secondary tank ends up in my group, I'll cast it on them to help with their agro.</p><p>I cast synergism on myself first, warlocks second, wizzies third, crusaders fourth, and conjurors fifth.</p><p>I try to distribute synergism before haste. I'll take away a hasted groupmember to cast a cross-raid synergism with no qualms.</p></blockquote>I am assuming you mean Illusiory arms here. Cause TC doesnt work on scouts i have tried with my assassin friend it didnt do anything to his CA timers recast or cast.

[Supernova17]

Jagone@The Bazaar wrote: <blockquote> I cast synergism on myself first, warlocks second, wizzies third, crusaders fourth, and conjurors fifth. </blockquote>I have to ask the reasoning behind this... Synergism gives the most benefit to the fast casters. Enchanters and Conjuror's (EoF spell haste spec'd) gain the most benefit from it, NOT Wizards and Warlocks. Synergism has an awesome proc rate, so why would you be putting it on classes that can push one, maybe two spells in four seconds where Enchancters and Conj's can get 4-5 off in the same time period? And why Crusaders before Conj's lol...they are almost as bad on cast times as a Sorceror, not all of their abilities are spells (they have CA's...), and most of the good Crusaders know that their auto attack damage adds up well, so they're not spam casting like a fast mage, leaving room between CA's and spells for their auto attack to go off.

[Antryg Mistrose]

<cite>Supernova17 wrote:</cite><blockquote>And why Crusaders before Conj's lol...they are almost as bad on cast times as a Sorceror, not all of their abilities are spells (they have CA's...), and most of the good Crusaders know that their auto attack damage adds up well, so they're not spam casting like a fast mage, leaving room between CA's and spells for their auto attack to go off. </blockquote>Comparing crusader cast times to sorcerers is going a bit far, they are pretty fast casting, and SK especially have far more damage spells than combat arts.  Spam casting is exactly what I do when tanking as the autoattacks fall in the gaps regardless, and don't represent a large part of dps compared to other fighters. SKs also have some spell haste, so do get decent benefits from spell procs (especially when in offensive stance with its higher INT) which is why I prefer synergism to haste.  I wouldn't put SKs above Conjurors normally, but certainly above a lot of other classes.  A tanking SK though, I'd put synergism on over every other class in the raid/group for obvious reasons.

[Firam]

Just a note on Illusory Arm... double attack does NOT have diminishing returns like haste/dps do.  Double attack is a straight % increase and maxes at the logical 100%.  Haste/DPS work on a diminishing returns scale and have an effective max of around 120% "real" increase when >200% in that buff.  I've seen almost 300% DPS while raiding before, and it most definitely doesn't triple my melee hits. =) So basically, put the Arm on whoever does the most autoattack DPS.  No class will be able to get over 75% DA without your help (AGI specced rogues are the closest), so you aren't "losing" any value from Arm. And yes, Haste should definitely go on whichever high-DPS melee class is currently the lowest.  Get everyone over 100% haste if possible.

[Controlor]

<cite>Firamas wrote:</cite><blockquote>Just a note on Illusory Arm... double attack does NOT have diminishing returns like haste/dps do.  Double attack is a straight % increase and maxes at the logical 100%.  Haste/DPS work on a diminishing returns scale and have an effective max of around <b>120% (1) </b>"real" increase when >200% in that buff.  I've seen almost 300% DPS while raiding before, and it most definitely doesn't triple my melee hits. =) So basically, put the Arm on whoever does the most autoattack DPS.  <b>No class will be able to get over 75% DA without your help (2)</b> (AGI specced rogues are the closest), so you aren't "losing" any value from Arm. And yes, Haste should definitely go on whichever high-DPS melee class is currently the lowest.  Get everyone over 100% haste if possible. </blockquote>1) Haste caps at 125% (actual) on cheracter that is about 200+ (displayed). 2) This is incorrect. I believe buckler speced warriors get around 76% (themselves). That i am not 100% posative on as i dont have a war. BUT Brawlers i know can get 12% / aa which totals to 96% double attack. This spec for a brawlers is str speced rarely used but i have seen a brawler use it befor (requires hands free). So yes the majority of classes arnt loosing any value to this buff (excluding the brawler str speced).

[Firam]

yeah yeah i forgot about brawlers (which is funny because i used to play one as my main before i went pvp).  i was thinking scouts mostly for this buff since thats who it generally lands on. but other than brawlers (most of who arent specced for DA if they're in a decent raid guild, by the way...) you really arent going to lose much if anything from putting this on anyone