I am the source :) I did extensive testing over several raids with various amounts of hit vs crit, and I've never had any of the average figures disagree significantly with the expected answer.
There used to be Blue posts saying it was a 2-roll system, but that was the old forums and they're gone.
This is pretty much "established knowledge". I think if anything you need to ask for a source for anyone that disputes it.
Mekkapiano 12:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Warlock DoTs Edit
I understand, very well, what you are trying to say, Mekka. However, I disagree with the use of "powerful" in any class description, as it is very vague, can mean different things, and is often the source of debate. My saying "...can have the highest [dot] output,..." means exactly the same thing you are trying to say, is shorter, and uses correct grammar. Yes, shadow Word:Pain has the highest individual damage output of all the DoTs, with CoA being second, but I'm not talking about individual spells. It is their combined damage output that makes the Warlock a DoT class.
I much prefer my own wording for it's conciseness, however I'm willing to compromise. What would you say to: "Warlocks can have the highest damage output when their Damage over Time spells are used in conjunction with each other,..."? Its very wordy, but you seem to be fond of your phrase "in conjunction", and this is the best I can do, while being specific. --17:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I was being a bit too pedantic :) What I'm trying to say is:
- Warlock DoTs are not individually the highest damage in the game. Shadow Word: Pain exceeds it, for example. Even a Feral Druid's Rip does.
- Warlock DoTs are the highest DoT damage in the game when many are combined.
I just thought the original wording, while awkward and bad grammar, at least expressed both those concepts. How about something like: "While a Warlock's Damage over Time spells are invidually not the highest damage DoTs in the game, the combination of many of them is unmatched."
Or whatever you feel like :) --Mekkapiano 21:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)