Return of Reckoning

I just don't like the fact of people going defensive and still doing damage due mechanics. If you go tank you should only be tanky. But as I said its just an idea, i'm more into risk/reward kind of play then turtle it up.

dur3al wrote:I also like the idea of an internal cool-down, its what is making more sense to me at this point, but I'm just gonna trow this idea here to see what everybody thinks, or if its even viable:

What if procs damage would scale with str/intelligence? Or if you do a big hit, you get the full amount of the proc damage, if you hit for 1, you get barely anything etc.

Reply & Introduction

Here's why I prefer either directly nerfing the proc damage or making it scale or any other solution than an internal cooldown on incoming outgoing procs. First of all internal cooldowns would make proc chance increase tactics worthless because regardless of how low they are such a cd would block a LOT of the damage from those tactics, due to their triggering being random (probabilistic). Second of all building synergy in a proc group relies on supplying AP to be able to constantly use abilities, using instant abilities, having high AA abilities etc. It gives quite a lot of room for playing around with the game and building group compositions. Insert an internal cd and all that becomes pointless, because likely unless the internal cd is like 0.2s short or less you will be procing the maximum amount regardless of the build your character is using making group building pointless. I would start gently with nerfing the damage output of the bright wizard/sorc procs by somewhere from 10-25%, then continue nerfing if damage is still over the top. I will explain below why I think this is appropriate in 3 parts.

Now to the real question, what is the problem with procs? Easy answer, most people would say too much damage. I would say there's 2 sides to the coin here. There is a learn to play issue and a real too much damage issue from the procs. Before certain netizens descend on my point here I would like to point out that completely non-proc groups HAVE DEFEATED proc groups soundly in 6v6 scenarios without the use of any special cheese tactics.

1.Learn to play issue

Now to the learn to play issue. To give just one example most people stack armour and have changed nothing about their approach with the proc meta. Armour doesn't help against a bright wizard or a sorc nor is it any use against procs. This basically means people are using their talisman slots in a very bad fashion against proc groups. Secondly the proc groups that my guild runs which are the primary cause of much of the current hatred against procs were specifically designed to beat standard WL and Marauder compositions. That is we knew exactly what out opponents were running and made the proc group composition specifically in regard to that. Some groups didn't react to this whatsoever and just kept playing their Mara/WL comps and understandably got defeated. A group who adapted and changed their comp was able to win without a BW proc against us. In any game where there are multiple available composition, even if it is balanced some compositions will counter each other, that is pretty much unavoidable. So there is a major l2p component and people not wanting to change their characters to be able to beat one setup component to this.


2.Too much damage

However, there is also a too much damage component to the procs, which has the same problem as too high wounds debuffs on Mara and Knight, and too high armour debuffs on WL and Mara. These skills are balanced for midgame or even endgame gear and hp pools and understandably they put a little bit too much pressure on people in the current state of the game. Furthermore certain abilities and tactics were broken that used to use procs eg.: the outdated screenshot at the start of this thread (A thank you to all the people that helped bug report and test Touch of Palsy, Riposte etc.) that was responsible for procs being ridiculous. A Touch of Palsy could have dealt 4-5k damage on a moving target. There are very few proc groups who are actually well geared and understand how to play their setups, because of this meta being fairly recent. Bug fixes on tactics and on movement skills are also fairly recent. People are still learning how to counter proc groups. I mean people even weren't using the knight triple shatter tactic for like 3 weeks when it was available and that was one of the best counters there was to destruction proc groups. However, even though I have my misgivings, I believe people's gut instinct/anger is correct and that procs do deal too much damage. My suggestion is just to nerf it slowly and gradually so that proc groups do not become completely extinct, but rather balanced with the other compositions available in the game.

3. Why procs are good for the game? (Sorry Slayer+WL & Choppa+Mara/2xMara)

If you think about it, RoR isn't a game with a lot of obvious synergies. Your armour debuff and you deal physical damage. You specific resist debuff and you deal that type of specific damage. This leads to unvaried group comps. There is little reason to run a BW+Slayer a DoK+Sorc, a Mara+Sorc, If engi was actually good you'd rather run an engi with a SW than a BW (Maybe it is now? TBD I think.). Simply because it's easier to debuff one damage type and then push that damage with a healdebuff. What group comps did we have in the optimized 6v6 meta before procs? Not many. There were at maximum 4-5 group composition that were relevant and probably less than that. If procs are usable/good they blow the previously stated limitations out of the window. Procs allow people to get creative with group composition in a lot of different ways. You can run various melee+ranged hybrid comps, you can run more varied ranged groups and build the group around maximizing the procs and surviving at the same time. You can get extremely creative. Starilas had a very creative proc group himself that I would never have thought of and I would never have believed it could work before I saw it work (Dps DoK, Heal DoK, WE, Mara, Sorc, Chosen). That's why I think procs should stay relevant. An internal cooldown will kill how synergies are built around procs and that's why I think it's a bad solution and I would just prefer it being nerfed either by scaling with stats or by reducing the proc damage.

Hum... The main problem I see with them procs (dok's covenant, WP prayers, Witchbrew, BW/sorc procs) is that they bypass toughness because they do not scale of intel/strength. Resist is great and all, but realistically, you can't really go beyond 50% mitigation (1200 resist...)

Hence, a proc heavy comp can smoke a tank with 1k+ toughness because he can't mitigate proc damage anymore than a dps can. And that's in 6v6. In RVR, it<s even worse.

Under no circumstance (except morale) should a SnB tank hit another SnB tank for 500 damage because he procced 2 covenant + a sorc buff. That is problem from my PoV.

I think a good approach, if possible, would be to make proc damage have low base tooltip that scale with attacker (or buffer) strength/intel. This way, a defensive tank could at least mitigate a good chunk of it and remain a nonviable target, while proc would remain somewhat strong against other dps that don't stack toughness.

Of course I see this from a tank PoV. IB biased a bit xD

Danielle wrote:

Spoiler:

Reply & Introduction

Here's why I prefer either directly nerfing the proc damage or making it scale or any other solution than an internal cooldown on incoming outgoing procs. First of all internal cooldowns would make proc chance increase tactics worthless because regardless of how low they are such a cd would block a LOT of the damage from those tactics, due to their triggering being random (probabilistic). Second of all building synergy in a proc group relies on supplying AP to be able to constantly use abilities, using instant abilities, having high AA abilities etc. It gives quite a lot of room for playing around with the game and building group compositions. Insert an internal cd and all that becomes pointless, because likely unless the internal cd is like 0.2s short or less you will be procing the maximum amount regardless of the build your character is using making group building pointless. I would start gently with nerfing the damage output of the bright wizard/sorc procs by somewhere from 10-25%, then continue nerfing if damage is still over the top. I will explain below why I think this is appropriate in 3 parts.

Now to the real question, what is the problem with procs? Easy answer, most people would say too much damage. I would say there's 2 sides to the coin here. There is a learn to play issue and a real too much damage issue from the procs. Before certain netizens descend on my point here I would like to point out that completely non-proc groups HAVE DEFEATED proc groups soundly in 6v6 scenarios without the use of any special cheese tactics.

1.Learn to play issue

Now to the learn to play issue. To give just one example most people stack armour and have changed nothing about their approach with the proc meta. Armour doesn't help against a bright wizard or a sorc nor is it any use against procs. This basically means people are using their talisman slots in a very bad fashion against proc groups. Secondly the proc groups that my guild runs which are the primary cause of much of the current hatred against procs were specifically designed to beat standard WL and Marauder compositions. That is we knew exactly what out opponents were running and made the proc group composition specifically in regard to that. Some groups didn't react to this whatsoever and just kept playing their Mara/WL comps and understandably got defeated. A group who adapted and changed their comp was able to win without a BW proc against us. In any game where there are multiple available composition, even if it is balanced some compositions will counter each other, that is pretty much unavoidable. So there is a major l2p component and people not wanting to change their characters to be able to beat one setup component to this.


2.Too much damage

However, there is also a too much damage component to the procs, which has the same problem as too high wounds debuffs on Mara and Knight, and too high armour debuffs on WL and Mara. These skills are balanced for midgame or even endgame gear and hp pools and understandably they put a little bit too much pressure on people in the current state of the game. Furthermore certain abilities and tactics were broken that used to use procs eg.: the outdated screenshot at the start of this thread (A thank you to all the people that helped bug report and test Touch of Palsy, Riposte etc.) that was responsible for procs being ridiculous. A Touch of Palsy could have dealt 4-5k damage on a moving target. There are very few proc groups who are actually well geared and understand how to play their setups, because of this meta being fairly recent. Bug fixes on tactics and on movement skills are also fairly recent. People are still learning how to counter proc groups. I mean people even weren't using the knight triple shatter tactic for like 3 weeks when it was available and that was one of the best counters there was to destruction proc groups. However, even though I have my misgivings, I believe people's gut instinct/anger is correct and that procs do deal too much damage. My suggestion is just to nerf it slowly and gradually so that proc groups do not become completely extinct, but rather balanced with the other compositions available in the game.

3. Why procs are good for the game? (Sorry Slayer+WL & Choppa+Mara/2xMara)

If you think about it, RoR isn't a game with a lot of obvious synergies. Your armour debuff and you deal physical damage. You specific resist debuff and you deal that type of specific damage. This leads to unvaried group comps. There is little reason to run a BW+Slayer a DoK+Sorc, a Mara+Sorc, If engi was actually good you'd rather run an engi with a SW than a BW (Maybe it is now? TBD I think.). Simply because it's easier to debuff one damage type and then push that damage with a healdebuff. What group comps did we have in the optimized 6v6 meta before procs? Not many. There were at maximum 4-5 group composition that were relevant and probably less than that. If procs are usable/good they blow the previously stated limitations out of the window. Procs allow people to get creative with group composition in a lot of different ways. You can run various melee+ranged hybrid comps, you can run more varied ranged groups and build the group around maximizing the procs and surviving at the same time. You can get extremely creative. Starilas had a very creative proc group himself that I would never have thought of and I would never have believed it could work before I saw it work (Dps DoK, Heal DoK, WE, Mara, Sorc, Chosen). That's why I think procs should stay relevant. An internal cooldown will kill how synergies are built around procs and that's why I think it's a bad solution and I would just prefer it being nerfed either by scaling with stats or by reducing the proc damage.

1) When we first encountered proc set up, it was told in our TS, that ranged setup with WL should beat you. On second time we slotted tactic destroy confidence and was able to barely survive, which is shown in Niky' SS In equal hands proc setup >> non-proc setup. You need to specifically counter it with specific setup which leaves as low face-to-face component as possible and mistakes are fatal. While dudes from proc group can faceroll spam couple buttons and still do unreasanoble amount of damage. Screenshot above is from couple sc's when our group used procs, replacing WL for BW. As you can see it was massive difference with encountering yours proc group. And this leaves us with not ltp issue but with "change your group members to reliably counter specific setups in 6v6 issue" or "use proc setup too" . But as we talking about meta that leads us to your №3

3) It actually severe limits your group composition because it is a MUST to have 2 Dok's and a Sorc with specific tactics, and you need Sorc not as DD who actually damages as intended- you need him as a buffer who will rebuff you when needed. And meta (fastest and most effective way to victory) becomes really dumbed down with even existence of this playstyle (your group comp mostly predetermined, your playstyle is not rich at all, cause of the efficency of procs and full def tanks doing more damage then ID speced slayer)

Procs is like Witchbrew for the whole group and i think it should be dealt accordingly by (re)introducing ICD.

Ktana wrote: 1) When we first encountered proc set up, it was told in our TS, that ranged setup with WL should beat you. On second time we slotted tactic destroy confidence and was able to barely survive, which is shown in Niky' SS

Spoiler:

In equal hands proc setup >> non-proc setup. You need to specifically counter it with specific setup which leaves as low face-to-face component as possible and mistakes are fatal. While dudes from proc group can faceroll spam couple buttons and still do unreasanoble amount of damage.

Spoiler:

Screenshot above is from couple sc's when our group used procs, replacing WL for BW. As you can see it was massive difference with encountering yours proc group. And this leaves us with not ltp issue but with "change your group members to reliably counter specific setups in 6v6 issue" or "use proc setup too" . But as we talking about meta that leads us to your №3

3) It actually severe limits your group composition because it is a MUST to have 2 Dok's and a Sorc with specific tactics, and you need Sorc not as DD who actually damages as intended- you need him as a buffer who will rebuff you when needed. And meta (fastest and most effective way to victory) becomes really dumbed down with even existence of this playstyle (your group comp mostly predetermined, your playstyle is not rich at all, cause of the efficency of procs and full def tanks doing more damage then ID speced slayer)

Procs is like Witchbrew for the whole group and i think it should be dealt accordingly by (re)introducing ICD.

Your second screenshot from Phoenix Gate is with a double premade (You+Katy Parry group(they might not have been full 6)) against a single premade with second group in scenario that had no healers that you are directly comparing to a Caledor Woods 6v6. That's not a reasonable comparison whatsoever and no grounds for a balance discussion. Basically it's a PUG argument that doesn't belong here. You never faced us in a 6v6 with anything else than WL+Slayer, double knight. You would win with double premade if you were running double engi double IB, double archmage just by assisting against the second unhealed group in that scenario. Your group setup wasn't an important part of that scenario.

Your slayer died in Caledor Woods, because he ran out of his KotBs guard range. That's an elementary mistake that has nothing to do with procs and for which he would be punished by any group composition. He's the only person to have died in the entire scenario.

LoB faced us with their own proc setup and lost (BW+Slayer), then they made a different group without procs and won. Procs OP confirmed? They didn't have a low face-to-face component and had a slayer fighting our melee throughout the scenario. That's another part of your theory about procs that is false. A low face-to-face component is not necessary, in fact it's undesirable to have a low face-to-face component against a proc group.

You permanently accuse our tanks of being full defensive, while Praedonius say they are full offensive. Though I will not fully disclose our specs here I can assure you our tanks are definitely not full defensive and never were (GMs can check that) and you just repeatedly make yourself look bad by repeating something that is completely factually wrong. I am sorry 2-hander knight with wounds debuff and ether dance 2-hander SM are now fully defensive tanks? As per our destruction tanks, using a shield does not immediatly make a tank 'full defensive'. Black Orc and Swordmaster ALWAYS did damage comparable to mdps regardless of procs. In scenarios where the enemy sit with their dmg on one of the dps it is often the case that that particular dps would deal less damage than the SM/BOrc. That has nothing to do with procs. Basicaly you bring absolutely irrelevant arguments and accuse procs of being the source of the issue when they are not.

You constantly repeat an ICD should be re-introduced despite it being proven by multiple pieces of evidence that it didn't exist, while presenting no evidence of your own whatsoever to the contrary. An ICD would likely kill all proc groups forever, because any substantial proc damage and synergy is based of high percentage proc rates over a short period of time. If you deal extra 50 damage every second, it becomes highly worthless to use any procs whatsoever, because the damage increase is worse than the worst possible damage increase tactic in the game. But I guess that's what you want, since you don't desire to change your setup and want to faceroll (had to return that compliment to you) on your double ap drain knight wl+slayer.

No procs don't limit your group setup. You can actually make more setups because you don't have to run 2x DoK. All you have to run is a sorc. One DoK is a must but that goes for any destruction group regardless of procs or no procs. You can spec the Sorc/BW any way you like except for one tactic. Sure you may get punished if that Sorc/BW is too offensive, but that has to do with your opponents and how they can catch that character, not with your intra-group synergy. Procs do bring variety and extra synergies to an otherwise stale meta. Procs are not like broken Witchbrew, with broken Witchbrew people would die in a single GCD, that is not what is happening with the current procs and yet again is another blatantly false statement from you. If you died in a single GCD how did your slayer deal 200k damage and your WL dealt 100k damage in that scenario?

Katy was not in full group thats for sure. We had more fights in scenarios that day and they all ended up with the same result.
In first post of this thread there is a screenshot where you can see damage of both of your tanks on slayer (ranges from 9 to 50 crit dmg) It is not damage which offensive tanks do. Also incoming dmg on you was rather small. All of this points they were defensive but because of unlimited procs they had insane pressure and dmg.
At this point it doesnt matter had we or had not ICD on procs, but

Danielle wrote: Except if you actually bothered to watch the video linked as evidence, at the suggested time 2:19-2:20, you would see FT proc twice in a single GCD and 1 second. Youtube videos have timestamps. If that still isn't enough for you, there's a second video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG8frNMjpcw&t=3m29s where you can even see the combat log showing there was no ICD.

The video with combat log clearly shows the procs were on different seconds. On the video without combat log procs also have 1 sec pause between them but its subjective because it has no combat log with timestamp.

If we are talking about meta (and we are) it limits group composition and tactic choice, because again meta is about the most shortest and succesfull way to victory. Also insane dmg from them without any consequences dumbs down gameplay.
Procs are broken like Witchbrew because of sudden ton of damage out of nowhere which makes defensive tanks do more dmg then DDs without procs which breaks core of this game at very least.

Also i think procs can dealt with like "On your guard!" is dealt with (targets can only be damaged once every 2 seconds with same proc)

I find the whole debate about procs somewhat moot. It's obvious that they're out of whack.

It's very similar like the bunker condi meta discussion in Guild Wars 2. I could go full bunker on my Mesmer, face-roll the keyboard and let conditions and procs blow up the vast majority of the people.

It didn't make me an exploiter, it made me smart to min/max the game mechanics that were available to me. However, at the same time I realised that it was pure cheese and required very little skill, and I certainly never felt the need to defend any proposed nerfs against it.

It's the same here. There are so many sources of procs that you can stack in your group composition, there is no CD on them and their actual damage is way too much for what a turtle setup should do. People are entitled to play how they wish within the available mechanics of the game, but there really is no justification for some game mechanics.

I totally agree with Sejanus and we should:

1) Look into proc rate - tactics which increase proc rate;
2) Add an internal cool-down on the procs;
3) Reduce damage - tactics that increase damage on procs;
4) Make procs not stack-able.

Procs should support damage. They should never become the main source of damage.

Ktana wrote: 1) When we first encountered proc set up, it was told in our TS, that ranged setup with WL should beat you. On second time we slotted tactic destroy confidence and was able to barely survive, which is shown in Niky' SS

Spoiler:

With double knight you should definitely survive (even without destroy confidence) but it will be very hard to kill anything as knight damage is very weak compared to SM or IB. And if you think a ranged setup would have killed us, then 1) why did you not try it? And 2)how does that support your argument that procs are too strong?

Ktana wrote: In equal hands proc setup >> non-proc setup. You need to specifically counter it with specific setup which leaves as low face-to-face component as possible and mistakes are fatal. While dudes from proc group can faceroll spam couple buttons and still do unreasanoble amount of damage.

There is not one setup that specifically counters the proc setup because you can run different variants in proc setups. The only thing you have to have in your group is shatter enchantment and preferably 2. Apart from that you can run anything from a full ranged kite group (for example Exodus who did very well) or full melee train with which LoB on destro killed us at some point. Also mistakes are fatal also for the proc group and if you just faceroll your buttons you will not kill a good premade, whatever spec you run.

Ktana wrote:

Spoiler:

Screenshot above is from couple sc's when our group used procs, replacing WL for BW. As you can see it was massive difference with encountering yours proc group. And this leaves us with not ltp issue but with "change your group members to reliably counter specific setups in 6v6 issue" or "use proc setup too" . But as we talking about meta that leads us to your №3

So the fact that you killed us once under very suboptimal conditions on our part in a 12v12 scenario is for you an argument that there is no way people can play better against the proc setups? I hope you see how few sense that makes. People can shatter way better and coordinated and how most proc groups reapply their buffs is still very slacking atm. That being said I would like to have a bit stronger counterplay which I will talk about in my own post following.

Ktana wrote:3) It actually severe limits your group composition because it is a MUST to have 2 Dok's and a Sorc with specific tactics, and you need Sorc not as DD who actually damages as intended- you need him as a buffer who will rebuff you when needed. And meta (fastest and most effective way to victory) becomes really dumbed down with even existence of this playstyle (your group comp mostly predetermined, your playstyle is not rich at all, cause of the efficency of procs and full def tanks doing more damage then ID speced slayer)

So first of all, you only look this from destro perspective. Second you do not need 2 DoK’s more than in any other setup. The sacrifice you make is letting your sorc run a gimped spec in order to gain more damage for your other dps and tanks. Doks and WP have nothing to do with this and I would say that is for a different discussion. Not in the least because DoKs and WPs also run the procs tactics in setups with the sorc/BW proc tactic. Further who decides how a class is intendent to play? They gave sorcs that proc tactic together with the shield on proc to give it more group utility. Who are you to decide that that is no the intendent way to play? As an example you can also argue that Warrior Priest is not intendent to be played as a ranged healer but as a melee healer. Do you want to change that and every other class so there is only one way you can play them, which would be the “intendent” way to play?

Ktana wrote: Procs is like Witchbrew for the whole group and i think it should be dealt accordingly by (re)introducing ICD.

The main difference between putting an icd on Whitchbrew (WB) and on the procs is the fact that the icd on WB only reduced the WE burst potential while putting an icd on the procs (not sure if you just mean the BW/Sorc proc, all procs separate or all procs together) you reduce the overall damage and would make the BW/Sorc tactic useless.

Next to Daniellita’s points I will give my own opinion on the proc matter and then give some solutions that I believe will be balanced for both proc setups and non-proc setups. First of all I believe we should look at the Sorc/BW proc separately from the DoK and WP procs.


So the BW/Sorc procs are obviously dealing an immense amount of damage. Higher tier gear will reduce this issue to a certain extend. Obviously the resistances will not go up too much, but the healing and wounds will and that should reduce the problem. There is two arguments you can make here: 1)We live here and now and it should be balanced for this gear; 2) We should look at the future and balance in a way that is also balanced for later stages. I can personally live with either.


I believe though that independent of which side you would choose we can balance the BW/Sorc procs in a better fashion. That is to increase the opportunity of counter play. The obvious counter play is to shatter the enchantments from the enemy. Currently it takes quite a while to shatter all the enchantments and they can be reapplied much easier. And exactly there is where I would like to make some changes to increase counter play potential. Some propositions:

1: Add a cooldown on Frozen Touch (FT) and Flames of Ruin (FoR) (and possible on Daemonic Chill (DC) and Flame Shield (FS)). Considering it would take 1 person to shatter 3 persons 30 seconds and then 15 seconds if you have 2 shatters. I would say somewhere between the 15 and 30 seconds would be good. This allows actual meaningful shatters, but still allows the proc using group to have the procs up at certain burst moments.

2: Let the extra 50% proc chance tactic on FT/FoR only work if you have both FT and DC up and respectively only work if you have FoR and FS up. This makes shattering easier because you only have to shatter 1 of the 2 enchantments to reduce the proc damage. It also means Sorcs and BWs have to keep track of both enchantments instead of 1. This brings a bit more skill and allows you to shatter during hard moments and have immediate effect instead of having to wait 5 more seconds to shatter the actual buff.

3 (Probs to Saani): Introduce a debuff that when FT or FoR gets shattered you will not be able to benefit from that buff (proc) for an x amount of time. I think something between 10 and 15 seconds should be fair. That is considering it takes about 6 seconds to shatter someone’s two buffs as one person. Obviously there will be more persons to shatter than one (hence about double the 6 seconds), but you might also bring 2 shatters with you.


If all else fails and you are of the opinion that the game should be balanced here and now then the last resort would be to directly nerf the damage of the procs. If you mess with any internal cooldowns you go against the whole point of the tactic. You would make it completely useless and if you want to have an internal cooldown over all procs together that would make it even worse, and even more so for destruction of course (because DoKs have 2 damage procs + 15% more proc chance tactic). In this light the best way to reduce the power of the procs is to 1) reduce the damage by x % or 2) reduce the increased proc chance tactic by x%. Both could be calculated to do the exact same thing, so it doesn’t really matter which one you choose. I would suggest starting with a small nerf of for example 10% of the damage and see where it stands. A slight damage nerf could also be in junction with any of the other proposals.


In terms of WP/DoK procs I would say that is a completely different discussion. As demonstrated because BW having a tactic which also increases the damage of FoR (where sorc has a defensive version) the total damage of procs on order and destroy became quite equal. Nerfing BW/Sorc would swing this a little bit in the favor of Destruction, which could make you wonder if you want to change anything on the order side (possible the WP Prayer of Devotion). But I wouldn’t go in any further on this or make a separate topic.

Ktana wrote: Katy was not in full group thats for sure. We had more fights in scenarios that day and they all ended up with the same result.
In first post of this thread there is a screenshot where you can see damage of both of your tanks on slayer (ranges from 9 to 50 crit dmg) It is not damage which offensive tanks do. Also incoming dmg on you was rather small. All of this points they were defensive but because of unlimited procs they had insane pressure and dmg.
At this point it doesnt matter had we or had not ICD on procs, but
Except if you actually bothered to watch the video linked as evidence, at the suggested time 2:19-2:20, you would see FT proc twice in a single GCD and 1 second. Youtube videos have timestamps. If that still isn't enough for you, there's a second video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG8frNMjpcw&t=3m29s where you can even see the combat log showing there was no ICD.

The video with combat log clearly shows the procs were on different seconds. On the video without combat log procs also have 1 sec pause between them but its subjective because it has no combat log with timestamp.

If we are talking about meta (and we are) it limits group composition and tactic choice, because again meta is about the most shortest and succesfull way to victory. Also insane dmg from them without any consequences dumbs down gameplay.
Procs are broken like Witchbrew because of sudden ton of damage out of nowhere which makes defensive tanks do more dmg then DDs without procs which breaks core of this game at very least.

Also i think procs can dealt with like "On your guard!" is dealt with (targets can only be damaged once every 2 seconds with same proc)

You missattribute low damage on tanks to defensive spec where it's caused by the lack of an armour debuff with DoK+Sorc against a slayer with 75% physical damage mitigation. I honestly don't care about your stuff from 12v12 scenarios because they are a much less controlled environment, show me in a 6v6 in CW or outside it how amazing your proc setup is and how we get destroyed by it when you have the same tools available.

Time recorded on a video is not a subjective measure. Put a stopwatch into your hand and time the amount between the two procs appearing in combat log. It is less than 0.1s-0.2s despite the fact they are listed on different seconds. If you don't have reaction times for that use a piece of software to do it for you.

Having balanced procs in the game allows more group compositions into a competitive meta. Having procs with an ICD doesn't allow those compositions whatsoever because it would reduce proc damage so drastically they would become absolutely irrelevant and not worth using a BW for. I don't disagree that in their current implementation and the state of the game procs are too strong. However there are other things that are also too strong in the same regard (armour/hp debuffs). Don't you think it's cheesy a Mara/WL can remove all the base armour of a light armour class with a single key press? You say there isn't a risk/reward. There is. A fully defensively speced BW with 0% chance to be crit, full armour talismans and 7k+ health with guard still dies like a fly against high damage output destruction setups (yes thsoe can exist even without sorc procs), by comparison a Slayer who isn't speced fully defensive can just stand there and take it against the very same setup. So there is substantial risk to running a Sorc/BW in any group.