we have an improved berserker stance, and an improved defensive stance...so why not an improved battle stance?
make it deep, just like the other imp stances, possibly replacing imp MS with it (since imp MS is crap rolled in **** tossed in *****). make it a 5-pt talent, and have it increase your chance to avoid (resist, miss) all attacks made against you while in battle stance by 1% per point and increase the critical strike damage bonus of all attacks made while in battle stance by 3% per point.
it gives incentive to use battle stance as more than a stop on the way to Overpower Blvd. or Tclap Way. with impale youre looking at 35% increased crit damage, which helps a lot in both pvp and pve affecting specials and 15% more crit damage on white hits while also providing a nice extra defensive boost. it synergizes well with other talents in the arms tree, even with ER to an extent (with the white damage crit bonus boost helping to feed more rage), as well as impale and 2h mastery.
of course, this is just *my* idea. others are, of course, welcome. ideally id think it would be something that could be useful in both pvp AND pve, but not overpowered in either. obviously imp battle stance is limited to affecting battle stance, so you wont be tanking with it (10% global reduction in damage is better than a 5% higher chance to be missed or resisted), but it provides an extra bit of protection while dpsing in a pve environment as well as giving arms warriors some extra damage and mitigation in pvp (in other words, battle, the balanced stance, receives bonuses that help a little in both offense and defense).
i suppose this is my long-winded way of saying "make deep arms worth it". i like flurry and sweeping strikes and imp execute and all, but id like even more to have a reason to spec past 35 points in the arms tree.
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- improved battle stance
improved battle stanceFollow
You'll get nerf cries so fast your head will spin.
While I like it and agree with it, to many people will cry overpowered. At least from a pvp perspective.
We're already very survivable. Reducing all dmg by 5% (basically) in a stance where we can spell reflect and don't take 10% extra dmg and the pvp community will cry crocidile tears.
Couple that with the 15% extra dmg on all crits, not just abilities and those tears become a river.
Though this would actually make people spec deep arms. 15% dmg mitigation over what we effectively have now plus 15% extra crit dmg is too good to pass up for anything else we have available.
Though this would be a slight nerf as well since we wouldn't have an instant rage free fear immunity on a short timer from being in the wrong stance. Spending almost all time in battle stance.
While I like it and agree with it, to many people will cry overpowered. At least from a pvp perspective.
We're already very survivable. Reducing all dmg by 5% (basically) in a stance where we can spell reflect and don't take 10% extra dmg and the pvp community will cry crocidile tears.
Couple that with the 15% extra dmg on all crits, not just abilities and those tears become a river.
Though this would actually make people spec deep arms. 15% dmg mitigation over what we effectively have now plus 15% extra crit dmg is too good to pass up for anything else we have available.
Though this would be a slight nerf as well since we wouldn't have an instant rage free fear immunity on a short timer from being in the wrong stance. Spending almost all time in battle stance.
exactly, there are tradeoffs. we have death wish, so we do get *a* fear break, but using zerker rage would require stance dancing. we're not as survivable as we could be if we were in def stance, but we are a bit harder to take down nonetheless. we lose crit rate, but gain crit damage, and since the arms tree is focused on getting larger crits, it seems a good match. we can still opt to gain the higher crit rate and AoE potential (with WW) by using zerker stance, and we'll likely need to switch fairly often thanks to intercept being zerker only, but we would have a strong incentive to want to use battle stance.
as it stands now, pvp is done almost exclusively in zerker. i get out to tclap and overpower, and on occasion if ive dropped combat, charge. theres also the odd rend on a rogue to keep him from bandaging or to make vanishing more difficult, but thats all its good for.
i do understand your points tho, so dont think im saying "joo r nub" or anything, i just want my arms tree back. fury is great and all, but id really like to stop pretending we dont have more tiers in arms past MS.
Edited, Nov 17th 2007 11:49am by Quor
as it stands now, pvp is done almost exclusively in zerker. i get out to tclap and overpower, and on occasion if ive dropped combat, charge. theres also the odd rend on a rogue to keep him from bandaging or to make vanishing more difficult, but thats all its good for.
i do understand your points tho, so dont think im saying "joo r nub" or anything, i just want my arms tree back. fury is great and all, but id really like to stop pretending we dont have more tiers in arms past MS.
Edited, Nov 17th 2007 11:49am by Quor
I understand completely what you getting at, and I agree it's a great idea. I'm just stating that it will gets cries of OP.
Hell we're already considered OP as is cause we are number one represented class in arena across 2 of the 3 brackets. Course no one take into account that when those statistics were taken we were one of the only two classes that had a healing debuff.
Hell we're already considered OP as is cause we are number one represented class in arena across 2 of the 3 brackets. Course no one take into account that when those statistics were taken we were one of the only two classes that had a healing debuff.
lol.
yeah, i find that stats people often quote quite funny, but not as funny as peoples reaction to them. you mean to say that the class thats balanced around group pvp does well when supported in a group pvp situation by competent players? gasp!
im reminded of a signature i saw on the O-boards once. it went something to the effect of:
"pre-bc
warriors: we suck in pvp, buff us blizz
everyone else: L2P AND GET A HEALER NUB LOLZ!!1!
post-bc
everyone else: WARRIORZ R IMBA IN ARENAZ NERF!!!11
warriors: we got our healers, QQ more"
yeah, i find that stats people often quote quite funny, but not as funny as peoples reaction to them. you mean to say that the class thats balanced around group pvp does well when supported in a group pvp situation by competent players? gasp!
im reminded of a signature i saw on the O-boards once. it went something to the effect of:
"pre-bc
warriors: we suck in pvp, buff us blizz
everyone else: L2P AND GET A HEALER NUB LOLZ!!1!
post-bc
everyone else: WARRIORZ R IMBA IN ARENAZ NERF!!!11
warriors: we got our healers, QQ more"
Lmao quor. I'd sign that if I didn't aready have enough in my signature.
That and I only 2v2 competitively. My 5v5 is just to help my guildies get points. Though it's kinda hard with everyone in raid spec and swapping people out ever 3 fights lol.
That and I only 2v2 competitively. My 5v5 is just to help my guildies get points. Though it's kinda hard with everyone in raid spec and swapping people out ever 3 fights lol.
Man, that brings back so many memories Quor. I remember talking to my old roommate back in those days, talking about how warriors could use a PvP buff, and that was his comment. 'It's your fault you're getting killed if you don't have a healer with you...you and I both know warrior is gimped without one. You have to have a pet healer to do anything worthwhile in PvP.'
Once we got what everyone called us nubs for not having (which, by the way, was NOT easy to get back in the day...how difficult was it to get a healer while tanking AV, let alone while smashing face), it became their problem, and we automatically needed a nerf. "Oh god, they've got a healer now? That's not fair, I can't get an easy kill and then call them a nub for not bringing a healer with them anymore. NERF!!!"
I guess mages were sad they couldn't Rank 1 frostbolt kite us to death anymore.
Once we got what everyone called us nubs for not having (which, by the way, was NOT easy to get back in the day...how difficult was it to get a healer while tanking AV, let alone while smashing face), it became their problem, and we automatically needed a nerf. "Oh god, they've got a healer now? That's not fair, I can't get an easy kill and then call them a nub for not bringing a healer with them anymore. NERF!!!"
I guess mages were sad they couldn't Rank 1 frostbolt kite us to death anymore.
Matter of fact Quor you should definitely sig that.
Scholar
31 posts
Improved Battle stance? interesting, but imo it fails. why?
First we can agree that the talent should be placed in arms, right?
Is it is now, arms is the pvp oriented tree in wow, recent patch made pvp speccing easier so people can get the awesome raid talents higher in the tree without nerfing their pvp abilities, but still in the core its a pvp tree.
In pvp you switch stances alot, you go berzerker for intercept, defencive for disarm, and battle stance for the most general situation since it don't have any of the other stances drawbacks.
Since you shift stance alot a talent that improves battle stance would hinder you in pvp more that it would help you by making the other stances less attractive. or a more commonly used term, its would imbalance the warrior class and undermine the whole style of how a warrior is played.
First we can agree that the talent should be placed in arms, right?
Is it is now, arms is the pvp oriented tree in wow, recent patch made pvp speccing easier so people can get the awesome raid talents higher in the tree without nerfing their pvp abilities, but still in the core its a pvp tree.
In pvp you switch stances alot, you go berzerker for intercept, defencive for disarm, and battle stance for the most general situation since it don't have any of the other stances drawbacks.
Since you shift stance alot a talent that improves battle stance would hinder you in pvp more that it would help you by making the other stances less attractive. or a more commonly used term, its would imbalance the warrior class and undermine the whole style of how a warrior is played.
Pvp warriors stay almost exclusively in berserker stance my friend. We only switch to the other stances to get off a single move then back to berserker.
Battle stance for the odd thunderclap and overpower. And if for some reason we drop combat we can charge.
Defensive for disarm (since the patch) or if we are the FF target and our healers are CC'd or spell locked in some way.
But for the vast majority of the time we are in berserker.
This change would make us one spec deep arms and two spend the majority of our time in battle stance.
Battle stance for the odd thunderclap and overpower. And if for some reason we drop combat we can charge.
Defensive for disarm (since the patch) or if we are the FF target and our healers are CC'd or spell locked in some way.
But for the vast majority of the time we are in berserker.
This change would make us one spec deep arms and two spend the majority of our time in battle stance.
id sig it if i could jim, but the wookie > all.
Recent Visitors: 420
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (420)
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- improved battle stance
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC