Mend Pet Glyph Nerf...

[Protego]

"The plan is that the glyph will make the Mend Pet tick twice as fast, last the same duration effectively doubling the amount healed, and no cooldown." http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic ... ?page=2#28

[AdamSavage]

Build 17227

Glyph of Mending Your Mend Pet now heals every 1 sec, and heals for an additional 25% of your pet's health over its duration. Major Glyph.

http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/331 ... uild-17227

[Quiv]

Build 17227

Glyph of Mending Your Mend Pet now heals every 1 sec, and heals for an additional 25% of your pet's health over its duration. Major Glyph.

http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/331 ... uild-17227

That is a GIGANTIC buff over the old mending glyph, my goddddddddd what a buff

[Sukurachi]

since this doesn't seem to be a nerf after all, maybe the thread's title should be changed to reflect that?

[Quiv]

I agree, the title should probably be changed to reflect the buff (or at least a neutral word like Change, since it is subject to change again).

Anyway, NEW TESTS! This is with a Tenacity pet at 388k, glyph of Animal bond.

Live
Seconds - Healing
1 - 0
2 - 47,828
3 - 0
4 - 47,828
5 - 0
6 - 47,828
7 - 0
8 - 47,828
9 - 0
10 - 47,828
Total over 10 seconds: 239,140

PTR
Seconds - Healing
1 - 29,892
2 - 29,892
3 - 29,892
4 - 29,892
5 - 29,892
6 - 29,892
7 - 29,892
8 - 29,892
9 - 29,892
10 - 29,892
Total - 298,920

Difference = 59,780 actual healing, or 5,978 HPS, increase. BUFFSSSSS

[AdamSavage]

That works out to be a 25% heal buff for the pets. That well help out alot in the lower gear lvls, and while questing.

[Equeon]

While reading through this thread, my reaction went from
"OH NO, WHY?!"

to

"SWEET JESUS, YES!"

What a turnaround!

[ilixirshy]

So I have a pet specific priest on stand by.... they don't seem to mind.

[Kurasu]

I actually worry(?) that this may make the Mend Pet glyph into a 'must have' because of the amount of buff. But maybe that's my opinion as a pet tanker.

While I love it, don't get me wrong, I *do* feel a little concern when a glyph is so good that I can't honestly understand why someone *wouldn't* take it.

[SpiritBinder]

You do have a very good point Kurasu, as much as the buff to this glyph is seriously amazing, it is definitely much more of a "must" now than it ever was for any tanking situation. So much so that it makes me think if they think they need to buff it that much, maybe mend pet should be the focus of a the buff rather than the glyph itself. This way it would keep the disparity between having the glyph and not lower, and feel a lot less mandatory.

[Sar]

Is that any different to now though?

I've not had in out of my inscribed glyphs this entire expansion

[Kurasu]

> I've not had in out of my inscribed glyphs this entire expansion

Which I thought was part of the reason for nerfing it in the first place. They may have *over*nerfed it, but I thought the nerf was so the glyph was 'useful, but not mandatory'.

Ticking for 1 second, *without* the healing buff (or a smaller one) would be a good glyph to be useful, but not *mandatory*, IMO. For tanking and PVP, faster heal ticks would potentially make a big difference.

Ticking for 1 second, *with* the healing buff, makes it rather more powerful IMO.

[Sar]

It's not because it was so OP, more that:

A: Mend Pet unglyphed is relatively weaker than it really should be.
B: Lack of good enough alternative Major Glyphs.

[Shuken]

I actually worry(?) that this may make the Mend Pet glyph into a 'must have' because of the amount of buff. But maybe that's my opinion as a pet tanker.

While I love it, don't get me wrong, I *do* feel a little concern when a glyph is so good that I can't honestly understand why someone *wouldn't* take it.

There are two main aspects to this game : Raiding and PVP. A majority of all balance changes revolve around these two aspects.

No serious raider or PVPer ever uses glyph of mend pet, nor will they after the patch.

The mend pet glyph is used for when you expect your pet to tank, and when you expect it to require more healing than the normal mend pet glyph can do. Depending on your level of gear, it happens in scenarios, heroic scenarios, warbringer soloing, isle of giants soloing, some old raids, pulling multiple mobs in open world, etc. I've been using the glyph a lot when I do these things but to say it is mandatory is ridiculous. Anytime I PvP, raid or do challenge modes I do not use the glyph. It's situational at best. Maybe as a hunter, you don't PVP or raid so then there are no reasons for you to switch mend pet glyph with something else but I don't know how meaningful that is considering that balance changes aren't based on the aspects of the game that you enjoy (I do enjoy those aspects too) and that these aspects are not generally known as the most important/popular.

It bothers me when people argue against buffs to their class but end up being completely wrong about it. It's one thing if there's a legitimate concern but when it's not it's annoying. So no, there are no dangers of the glyph being "mandatory". Besides, the second a glyph becomes good and useful in a given situation it becomes mandatory. It's semantic but it can hardly be avoided. Also, if you want to raise a concern that the glyph is overpowered and will allow hunters to solo stuff they shouldn't be able to, that's a more valid concern, but it remains to be seen if we'll become better than DK tanks after the spirit bond buff and the mend pet glyph buff.

[SpiritBinder]

There are two main aspects to this game : Raiding PVE and PVP. A majority of all balance changes revolve around these two aspects.

There you go, fixed that for you.

No serious raider or PVPer ever uses glyph of mend pet, nor will they after the patch.

The mend pet glyph is used for when you expect your pet to tank, and when you expect it to require more healing than the normal mend pet glyph can do. Depending on your level of gear, it happens in scenarios, heroic scenarios, warbringer soloing, isle of giants soloing, some old raids, pulling multiple mobs in open world, etc. I've been using the glyph a lot when I do these things but to say it is mandatory is ridiculous.

1st of all, Kurasu whom your quoting already stated “But maybe that's my opinion as a pet tanker.” So yes, this Glyph feel very much like a “MUST Have” (as he also said.) if your tanking. In fact above you already listed a plethora of areas where this glyph already shines well above others, AND, this is in its current form, not even the buffed version.

Also No one said that this is a mandatory glyph for all situations, to which your reply is suggesting Kurasu said, again he said “But maybe that's my opinion as a pet tanker.” Meaning he implied this was from a tanking perspective.

Anytime I PvP, raid or do challenge modes I do not use the glyph. It's situational at best. Maybe as a hunter, you don't PVP or raid so then there are no reasons for you to switch mend pet glyph with something else but I don't know how meaningful that is considering that balance changes aren't based on the aspects of the game that you enjoy (I do enjoy those aspects too) and that these aspects are not generally known as the most important/popular.

Well you see I don’t PvP, raid (I LFR but that’s only to continue with my legendary quest) or do challenge modes. In fact I do scenarios, heroic scenarios, warbringer soloing, isle of giants soloing, some old raids, pulling multiple mobs in open world, etc. Literally that’s pretty much all I do. So you can see while this might not be a big deal for you and your play style, it’s pretty important to mine, and others.

It bothers me when people argue against buffs to their class but end up being completely wrong about it. It's one thing if there's a legitimate concern but when it's not it's annoying. So no, there are no dangers of the glyph being "mandatory".

No one here is arguing against having our class buffed, our pet survivability is in a bad place atm compared to other pet tanking classes and it’s lower and weaker than it has been in prior expansions too. People are just airing concern the way they are going about it. With our pets tanking being weaker we actually lean on glyphs like these more than other classes, and when that glyph is buffed even more so, it becomes increasing attractive.

You’ve already stated that this glyph is of little concern to you due to your playstyle, but then call those whom it is important to “annoying” and not “legtiamte”. I’m telling you that this glyph for me is very important to my playstyle atm, and when the next patch comes out, the new version will feel very very mandatory, and no, you cannot tell me or others that it’s not, because this glyph does not concern you or impact on your playstyle.

Besides, the second a glyph becomes good and useful in a given situation it becomes mandatory. It's semantic but it can hardly be avoided. Also, if you want to raise a concern that the glyph is overpowered and will allow hunters to solo stuff they shouldn't be able to, that's a more valid concern, but it remains to be seen if we'll become better than DK tanks after the spirit bond buff and the mend pet glyph buff.

Lastly I find it confusing that after all you stated prior, you finish off by staying “Besides, the second a glyph becomes good and useful in a given situation it becomes mandatory”
This glyph is good in a tanking (given) situation as it is. This Glyph become Very Very VERY good in tanking (given) situation next patch. So you now telling us that it is already mandatory, and becomes even more so next patch.

This…. is what Kurasu was voicing his concern about, and you already agree with him, in fact he was saying it may make this a “Must Have” and you said mandatory.

[Sar]

But Spirit, sweetie, unless you're a raider or a PvP'er, your opinion doesn't count, because you're playing the game wrong!

Obviously!





Facetious statements aside, I rarely raid with my hunter (I don't even really LFR with her - it's a cesspool and I can barely stomach it once a week on my paladin), given that I tank with my guild on my Paladin main, but even when I do, I tend to have this glyphed mainly because there aren't a huge plethora of mandatory or just plain better glyphs available.

Liberation? Maybe for the free small self-heal, it's more useful when soloing
Animal Bond? Necessary
Deterrence? Fairly necessary
Mirrored Blades? Marginal DPS increase at best.

[Myrrmi]

I agree, the issue here is not the (even increased) usefulnes of Mend glyph, it's the lack of alternatives worth the bother to switching into them, unless you seriously raid or pvp. And that's about major glyphs. Don't even have me started on the minor ones... /sigh

/need more interesting, worthwhile glyps

[Slickrock]

Shuken does have a point from a pure raiding perspective, I NEVER need to touch mend pet during raids. Pet is either fine or one-shot, so not much need there.

I barely ever used Mend until I started working on Warscouts and Warbringers.

But, with the Timeless Isle, even the lordly raiding-only hunters are likely gonna need to solo some rares, so, yeah, it's needed now.

[Quiv]

Seeing how small a niche this glyph appeals to in the hunter community and how circumstantial it is, I can't imagine this will be much a problem*. Now if it is so good that PVPers feel the need to all start running it as mandatory, then it will change. I don't pvp much, and I say that with full respect to the pvp community, but I can't imagine this being the case myself.

Just my two cents.

[Shuken]

There are two main aspects to this game : Raiding PVE and PVP. A majority of all balance changes revolve around these two aspects.

There you go, fixed that for you.

Don't try to fix what's not broken. A majority of balance changes do not revolve around PVE as a whole. Blizzard does not care that some classes can solo warbringers while others can't. It doesn't care to make sure all classes can solo old raids equally. A huge majority of all balance changes revolves around battlegrounds, arena and raiding. I'd say that a majority of max level players dabble in some of those areas even if it's just LFR or just random BGs.

Anytime I PvP, raid or do challenge modes I do not use the glyph. It's situational at best. Maybe as a hunter, you don't PVP or raid so then there are no reasons for you to switch mend pet glyph with something else but I don't know how meaningful that is considering that balance changes aren't based on the aspects of the game that you enjoy (I do enjoy those aspects too) and that these aspects are not generally known as the most important/popular.

Well you see I don’t PvP, raid (I LFR but that’s only to continue with my legendary quest) or do challenge modes. In fact I do scenarios, heroic scenarios, warbringer soloing, isle of giants soloing, some old raids, pulling multiple mobs in open world, etc. Literally that’s pretty much all I do. So you can see while this might not be a big deal for you and your play style, it’s pretty important to mine, and others.

I have no clue how you read what is quoted above and went : "So you can see while this might not be a big deal for you and your play style, it’s pretty important to mine, and others."

I do use the glyph, it is important to me in certain situations albeit not being mandatory and something I use all the time. Many times I use other glyphs, and I am certain I am not alone in the matter.

You appear to have misconstrued the whole point of my post which is to stop hunters from saying the glyph is mandatory when it's not. It was a fairly simple point and you went ahead and attributed a whole bunch of intentions to it for reasons that are unclear to me.

It bothers me when people argue against buffs to their class but end up being completely wrong about it. It's one thing if there's a legitimate concern but when it's not it's annoying. So no, there are no dangers of the glyph being "mandatory".

No one here is arguing against having our class buffed, our pet survivability is in a bad place atm compared to other pet tanking classes and it’s lower and weaker than it has been in prior expansions too. People are just airing concern the way they are going about it. With our pets tanking being weaker we actually lean on glyphs like these more than other classes, and when that glyph is buffed even more so, it becomes increasing attractive.

The poster I quoted hinted at the fact the glyph was mandatory. Glyphs being mandatory is something that is not the current design intent. Blizzard tends to act on that.

You’ve already stated that this glyph is of little concern to you due to your playstyle, but then call those whom it is important to “annoying” and not “legtiamte”. I’m telling you that this glyph for me is very important to my playstyle atm, and when the next patch comes out, the new version will feel very very mandatory, and no, you cannot tell me or others that it’s not, because this glyph does not concern you or impact on your playstyle.

I have stated no such thing.

And I have no called those who find it important annoying. As I said above you have completely misunderstood a simple thing.

And what does playstyle even mean ? It's got nothing to do with "playstyle". It's pet tanking situations. That isn't a playstyle it's a situation you find yourself in.

Besides, the second a glyph becomes good and useful in a given situation it becomes mandatory. It's semantic but it can hardly be avoided. Also, if you want to raise a concern that the glyph is overpowered and will allow hunters to solo stuff they shouldn't be able to, that's a more valid concern, but it remains to be seen if we'll become better than DK tanks after the spirit bond buff and the mend pet glyph buff.

Lastly I find it confusing that after all you stated prior, you finish off by staying “Besides, the second a glyph becomes good and useful in a given situation it becomes mandatory”
This glyph is good in a tanking (given) situation as it is. This Glyph become Very Very VERY good in tanking (given) situation next patch. So you now telling us that it is already mandatory, and becomes even more so next patch.

This…. is what Kurasu was voicing his concern about, and you already agree with him, in fact he was saying it may make this a “Must Have” and you said mandatory.

All I'm saying is that if something is used situationally, it's kind of the opposite of something being mandatory, or "must have".