Saturday, April 12, 2008
A Vision of Fire-Lock Raiding
SK Gaming, known for their ground-breaking encounters and incredibly drawn-out video introductions, has taken down the Eredar Twins in fiery fashion. Fiery Warlock fashion, that is.
In this video of their Sunwell encounter, the raid is comprised of 3 Warlocks, all of which are specced for Fire DPS. It's a little surprising and out of the ordinary to have zero Shadow Warlocks in a raid, but as you will see via the performance of the Fire 'locks, it actually works out very well!
What it must come down to is raid composition in this case. I see a few Mages on the field, but I don't believe there are any Shadow Priests (no Shadow Weaving?). Such a composition would definitely tilt the scale into Fire 'locking's favor, and boy does it ever.
But still, I wonder how Shadow Warlocks could perform in a situation such as this... but that's a topic for a different time.
Here's more fuel for the Fire vs. Shadow debate. Enjoy. ;)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hmmm, the numbers aren't as eye-popping as the Shadow variant (no 10k+ shadow bolts T_T) But I suppose the haste makes up for it?
I still think the overall utility from a better functioning SPriest outweighs the 50-100DPS difference, but in a fight where timing is paramount, I can see Fire coming out on top in the end - might help you get your haste capped out earlier, too (is there such a thing as a haste cap for warlocks? I think the mages have one).
P.S. No, I haven't had much time to play either toon, actually =\ Finals are coming up and all, and I got a preliminary acceptance in Calgary for med so...not much WoW until things settle down, lol.
Best of luck with the baby!
Le Fuzz
You're right about raid composition Jagoex, but if a fire mage is in the group all warlocks should spec fire whether a shadow priest is there or not.
@Le Fuzz: Congrats on your acceptance! That's a big deal bud. /toast
With regards to the Fire vs. Shadow debate, the numbers seem to lean in Fire's favor, but there's an entirely different, less-defined angle that may help us figure this thing out. I'll explain later tonight.
@anon: I think it's a little more complicated than that. Damage isn't the only variable, after all (hint, hint!).
Post a Comment