How will stat priorities change in Mists of Pandaria?

From the latest bit of datamining on wowdb.com, we get to see some of the Jewelcrafting gems that are likely to be in the game when Mists of Pandaria launches.  I was very interested to see the proportionality between primary and secondary stats on these new gems.

In their current incarnations, with the exception of Stamina, primary and secondary stats are proportional on gems of equal rarity.  For instance, using the Cataclysm blue-quality gems, a Delicate Inferno Ruby has +40 Agility, and a Smooth Amberjewel has +40 Critical Strike Rating.  For DPS specs, this makes gems with secondary stats – in whole or in part – inferior to red gems, since reds give us the greatest benefit by far.  There are exceptions, of course, particularly when there is a favorable socket bonus (+30 Agility, for instance) rewarding us for choosing, say, an orange gem such as a Deadly Ember Topaz (+20 Agility, +20 Crit Rating).

Looking to the near future, the amount of secondary stats could possibly be increasing by 50% on gems in MoP – which puts secondary stats in line with Stamina in that regard – as evidenced by these examples:

(Red Gem)

(Yellow Gem)

Here, the difference is apparent: yellow (550) Jewelcrafting gems will have 160 more (+50%) of their stats than will their red counterparts.

What I could extrapolate from this is that the proportionality will follow for blue-quality gems as well, but that doesn’t seem to be the case just yet.  Professions are not finished yet, and wowdb.com has what looks like an incomplete list of gems with disturbingly inharmonious values.

So I won’t do that.

However, IF this proportionality comes to pass for gems, it could serve to alter the way we think about both gemming and stat priorities in MoP.

Currently, for hunters, Agility is king on non-ranged-weapon gear.  From personal experience, I know that this is the same for cat druids, while Strength is king for plate DPS, as is Intellect for Balance druids and other casters.  This situation has had an affect on multiple areas of the game, from gemming, enchanting and gear choices to the Auction House, where red gems have routinely sold for much more gold than other colors throughout the expansion.

What if Blizzard is changing that?  If stat values remain relatively the same but our gemming options change, we may have to look closer at the values – both performance- and gold-wise – of gems as we make choices about how to gem our gear.  We don’t have a concrete gear list yet, so we don’t know what socket bonuses will look like.  But as things stand today, that MoP orange gem looks a lot more attractive, relative to a red gem, than today’s orange gems do.*

*And I’m not just talking about how much larger the stats are than the Cataclysm ones – that’s always a given.

Additionally, I wonder if there is going to be much of a difference in how stats are prioritized for various specs.  If we see anything that tightens the gap between primary and secondary stat values, a change to gems such as the one we see on the JC-only gems above could give players a little more choice when it comes to decking out their gear, in addition to fixing the lopsidedness of the gem market.

I’m not saying this will happen – we have to wait and see – but seeing these JC gems certainly got me thinking.

- – -

Thanks for reading this post by Mushan at Mushan, Etc.  Comments are welcome!

About these ads

3 Comments on “How will stat priorities change in Mists of Pandaria?”

  1. [...] if Blizzard is changing that? . . . Read full article (No Ratings Yet)  Loading [...]

  2. Splee says:

    May I add into that, that ” we may have to look closer at the values ” is saying it softly?

    At the start of T13, i had stat values like 1.8/1.5/0.9 and agility on 4. Clear enough. But it has lowered, to agility three, 1.8/1.2/0.9 or something like it.

    With the changing stat values, with set bonusses, gear, boss tactics etc, making the decision to have X primary stats and 3X/2 secondary stat gems seems like it makes gemming too hard. Or rather, to expensive to keep the best gems.

    • Mushan says:

      I do not know the stat weights for MoP yet; if the value of Agility has changed relative to the secondary stats as much as it looks like from your ratios, then yes, I was “saying it softly”. However, keep in mind that what’s on beta, tuning-wise, is not written in stone yet.

      That said… I don’t necessarily agree that the potential formula we’re looking at on gems [ratio (primary stats:secondary stats)=(1X:3X/2)] will make gemming too hard. In fact, I think it has the potential to make it more interesting.

      At the moment (T13), there are fairly clear answers to ‘what is best’:

      Currently, with blacksmithing sockets, my hunter has 21 sockets plus a meta gem, which I’ll ignore for this example. Of those pieces of gear, only three require anything other than full red gems (and those three have one orange socket apiece), and every socket bonus provides an extra +10, +20 or +30 Agility. As of this writing, I only have blue-quality gems (+40 Agility, etc.) socketed.

      Of those 21 sockets, 19 are filled with Delicate Inferno Rubies. Two have Deadly Ember Topaz gems, giving me a +20 and a +30 Agility bonus, respectively. The other orange socket, on the Valor ring (which has a socket bonus of +10 Agility for placing an orange gem), has a Delicate socketed, sacrificing 20 Crit rating (if I had used a Deadly) for 10 more Agility. The difference here – for one socket – is arguable, but also negligible, given current stat values relative to total overall amounts of Agility and Crit rating from gear / gems / enchants on a given toon.

      A (19/21):(Red/Total gem) ratio feels very simple and clear to me. The red gem not only rules, but Blizzard expects it to rule.

      I know, I took a billion words to say that…. but, from my perspective, gemming in Cataclysm has been so much easier than it was back in Wrath. In MoP, there is potential for much more interesting choices if gems look proportionally like they did yesterday on wowdb.com – particularly as we move to the later tiers, where we’ll likely have more sockets on gear. Depending on how stat values finally settle out, theorycrafting with regard to gemming and enchanting could become much more interesting than it is now, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, in my opinion. And as I said, it would likely affect the market, making mixed gems more valuable and cutting the high costs of reds down a bit (as Frostheim says, “narrowing the gap” – in this case, red gems are both the performance and cost outliers in the gem world). In theory, it could be relatively less expensive to gem in MoP if reds become a bit less the clear-cut kings and oranges become more valuable. I could be wrong there, though.

      Ultimately, I’ve found that how you play is as, and potentially more, important than how you gem – provided you add gems that will increase DPS, of course. What I point out in this post is nothing more than that the potential for a shakeup in how we think about gemming / enchanting is there, given the information we have at the moment.

      Thanks for your comment!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 71 other followers