Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

2.4 Warrior suggestion.Follow

#77 Jan 28 2008 at 2:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Actually, getting the 'interupt' effect of the glove would be nice. I'd love to use my T5 gloves for pvp (The Rogue T5 gloves are pretty much the best part of that set and by switching out some pvp and pve gear, I can keep 300resi and reach 2k+ atk) to increase my damage... but I really can't. Interupt on DT is just too powerful. It turns the ability from a lackluster to actually worth a damn.

Adding a Cooldown makes sense, but it can't be longer (or not much longer) then the snare attached to DT, since DT serves 2 purpose here (ranged interupt and ranged snare). But since the snare last 6 second, an 'earth shock-like' cooldown work just fine.

Quote:

I'd just say 'law of unintended consequences', but in what way is this a good thing?


To be honest, balance changes are kinda moot as far as 2v2 go as long as the 'druid situation' isn't addressed. I just dropped that in there to try and make the post more rounded.

Quote:
i maintain that daggers need to have a native resilience ignore based on rogue attack power, something alone the lines of 10% of a rogues AP in resilience ignored.

its a pvp buff that doesnt affect pve in any way and it counters the stat that killed daggers while also letting daggers shine in their own way. a rogue with 1600 ap (not hard to obtain in pvp with the right gemming and enchants) would ignore 160 resilience when using daggers. if the value is too low to be effective it can be upped a bit, but i think the core idea is strong.


While I like your spirit and this is a really cute change... it's also a lost cause.

Resilience didn't kill Dagger. No, Resilience tied its hands behind its back and put a black bag on its head, but it was the scaling Stamina/HP that pulled the trigger and the scaling of healing that put the body in its trunk, drove it the old pier and tossed it in the lake. Later investigation showed that positional requirement* ordered the hit.

There's just way to many factor working against dagger for a simple fix like you're suggesting to have enough impact.

Even were it possible to totally ignore Resilience with Dagger... you'd get a 4k Ambush, followed by a 2.5k Backstab... and then what? You got him down to 45%! Woot! Your target then gets healed damn near back up to full by a flash of light crit? Not to mention that the damage goes down the drain if you're fighting something else then a clothie (the above burst will only do 4k dmg on a mail wearer).

Of course, in a 2dps team, combined with some CC... or in 3s... or in a 4dps 5v5, this would win some games. But in the end, the game has changed to much for this to be viable. Once people survive your opening shot, you're the weakest possible rogue spec around. And there's many way to survive burst damage nowaday...


*Once me and Sife went up against another Rogue/priest team. Both rogue went for the priest. Their rogue was mutilate. Sife put his back to a wall. I killed his priest and sife never even went down below 50%. Fun times.
#78 Jan 28 2008 at 3:50 PM Rating: Default
**
454 posts
This game is balanced (or meant to be) around 5s, so shut up about 2s, 3s, 1s, BGs and world PvP. Go home and whine all you want, but 5s is what blizzard wants to balance PvP around. From that point of view - warriors needs a nerf, what it is, I don't know.

The above was only written so people might stop writing about 2s, 3s, 1s, BGs and world PvP, and start looking at 5s which is the important arena.

Sincerly yours Krqllebqlle (who is btw a sad panda since they stopped making the ice cream named krøllebølle) :(
#79 Jan 28 2008 at 5:44 PM Rating: Good
RPZip for president in 08!

This thread delivers.
#80 Jan 28 2008 at 11:45 PM Rating: Good
**
362 posts
Quote:
This game is balanced (or meant to be) around 5s, so shut up about 2s, 3s, 1s, BGs and world PvP. Go home and whine all you want, but 5s is what blizzard wants to balance PvP around. From that point of view - warriors needs a nerf, what it is, I don't know.

The above was only written so people might stop writing about 2s, 3s, 1s, BGs and world PvP, and start looking at 5s which is the important arena.


So they say. "Only 5v5 matter". And why is thet so?
It always makes me smile when class which is doing great in World PvP, superb in 2v2 and well in 3v3 yell - "We do own 4/5 of any PvP but it doesn't matter - only 5v5 is important we want to rule there. And not instead, additionally rather.
I want you to consider that. Why is 5v5 bracket so important.
Answer seems simple - it gives most arena points. Yes it is truth.
But is it really so damn important? Not really. Half decent 3v3 team with 1600 - 1700 rating will give its members enough points to buy all arena gear avialable. It will take longer but gear is there.
Introduction of personal rating moved the importance in arena from getting a lot of points into getting personal rating. It is much better now to have succesfull 2v2 team then semigood 5v5 team.
Whats more 2v2 and 3v3 teams have many advantages - easier to gather people to play, easier to find good ones to create, doable by irl friends ...

5v5 has only one advanatage - more ponts so 1/2 weeks faster gearing up.

Given above I will say agin - It makes me smile when class rulling lower brakets says its not important.

As for me personaly, I always wanted 1v1 strenght most. This is my main drive in all what I do. Maybe its because my roots are deep in single player RPGs (Eye of the Beholder - anyone?) and in paper/pen RPGs, but being able to stand my own 1v1 is actually very important for me. I believe it is important for all who are actually underdogs in that field. Only those who rule 1v1 say "it is not important".
#81 Jan 29 2008 at 3:30 AM Rating: Decent
Ok let me just say this. Warriors being so powerful at level 70 is payback for being walked all over in lower levels. Its payback for being unable to sneak past mobs to get the quest objective. Its payback for all the times we died because we can't heal and we don't have a pet to absorb damage. Its also payback for every time we got excluded out of groups when we didn't want to tank. Arena dominance was hard earned because getting that warrior to 70 wasn't easy. They won't be nerfed because blizzard gave them those abilities to reward hard work. I was an arms spec'd warrior and I never got into any groups and I had to grind it solo. No pets. No minions. And no heals, buffs, or ranged attacks to keep me out of harms way.
#82 Jan 29 2008 at 6:33 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
Quote:
Ok let me just say this. Warriors being so powerful at level 70 is payback for being walked all over in lower levels. Its payback for being unable to sneak past mobs to get the quest objective. Its payback for all the times we died because we can't heal and we don't have a pet to absorb damage. Its also payback for every time we got excluded out of groups when we didn't want to tank. Arena dominance was hard earned because getting that warrior to 70 wasn't easy. They won't be nerfed because blizzard gave them those abilities to reward hard work. I was an arms spec'd warrior and I never got into any groups and I had to grind it solo. No pets. No minions. And no heals, buffs, or ranged attacks to keep me out of harms way.


Leveling from 1-70 takes a casual player a month, and a hardcore one can do it in two weeks. So you're saying that because you suffer for a month/three weeks, that you're justified in being overpowered for a ~year afterwards?
#83 Jan 29 2008 at 7:39 AM Rating: Good
***
1,395 posts
Shaolinz wrote:
Leveling from 1-70 takes a casual player a month, and a hardcore one can do it in two weeks. So you're saying that because you suffer for a month/three weeks, that you're justified in being overpowered for a ~year afterwards?

When was the last time you leveled a warrior?

The time it takes to 70 is all about how much you want to learn while playing. I didn't rush anything to get to level 60, and I had 25 days /played right there. My hunter had 12 days /played at 70, and my current hunter was at 4 days /played at 60. I think I've turned out an ok hunter and warrior, simply because I wasn't retarded enough to rush to 70 on my first char just to have something to brag about.

You're a living example, because there's a backside to it: Having the knowledge base of an e-bay:er is nothing to brag about.
#84 Jan 29 2008 at 8:03 AM Rating: Default
***
3,011 posts
I leveled my paladin from 1-60 in two weeks, I leveled my rogue from 60-70 in a month's play time during one of the hardest semesters of school I had.

Leveling in world of warcraft is ridiculously easy, regardless of what class you are.


And you make like you're the ONLY CLASS that has difficulty at some points. Ask rogues what it's like to have to fight beast mobs (sure you can "stealth past them to the objective" but when you reach your objective you have to drop stealth anyway and hence have to carefully plan your kills so that you don't aggro more than one mob at a time). I leveled as daggers though, and I'd assume it'd be a bit easier with maces due to BF but still my point stands. Warriors don't have any more of a "weakness" in leveling than anyone else does. Mages, Priests, Paladins, are mana intensive and have to take occasional breaks, rogues are squishy and get torn up by multiple mobs and or beast/mechanical/elite mobs easily, Hunters have to keep the damn pet fed else it runs off, Warlocks have to do these ridiculously long quests for their abilities, etc etc.

The fact that you have to sit down and eat after every two-three mobs is no "weakness" really.

Edit: Oh, and to the other guy who said he "takes his time" leveling.

That argument isn't valid in this case, as you're making your own hell. That's like me complaining about how daggers sucked at leveling: I should have just switched to swords then and there. If you want to "take your time" (which is stupid I might add, as you basically learn all the class mechanics for any class at level ~40 and just repeat them endlessly till 70) then that's your own trouble. The original argument was that warriors are "harder" to level than other classes and that's why their power is justified.

Edited, Jan 29th 2008 10:06am by Shaolinz
#85 Jan 29 2008 at 8:21 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
Shao...your arguments suck. Regularly.
#86 Jan 29 2008 at 10:27 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,395 posts
Shaolinz wrote:
I leveled my paladin from 1-60 in two weeks, I leveled my rogue from 60-70 in a month's play time during one of the hardest semesters of school I had.

Leveling in world of warcraft is ridiculously easy, regardless of what class you are.

And I've leveled a warrior to 70, a hunter to 70 and another hunter to 60. If you mean to say there's not a huge difference leveling those to classes you're either a liar or a ******... preferably both.

Shaolinz wrote:
And you make like you're the ONLY CLASS that has difficulty at some points. Ask rogues what it's like to have to fight beast mobs (sure you can "stealth past them to the objective" but when you reach your objective you have to drop stealth anyway and hence have to carefully plan your kills so that you don't aggro more than one mob at a time).

You really don't have a clue what you're talking about. You have TWO wtf abilities, one being LOL U CNA'T SE ME and the other being LOL U CNA'T HITT ME. Both of them being on a 5 min CD. That in combination with skillful stunlocking makes you vastly superior to warriors in terms of avoiding damage. The only thing like it we have is Shield Wall, which is on a 30 min CD.

Future Nub wrote:
BUTT OFC WE SHODUL NOT BE HITTED! WE HAS LESS ARMROR THATN U!

That argument is void, since your armour sucks in leveling greens anyway. Hell, it's not even that good in blues, most of the time a shield will increase your armour with around 100%.

Shaolinz wrote:
Warriors don't have any more of a "weakness" in leveling than anyone else does. Mages

Aka Ice Cube, Sheepzter, Nova-pee-on-ur-foot-lol and Ice Barrier man.
Shaolinz wrote:
Priests

Shadowform, fear, drain, Power Word: Your Momma... most priests agree they are a piece of cake to level.
Shaolinz wrote:
Paladins

Hey there Bubble boy! Lay on Hands, Hammer of @#%^ness...
Shaolinz wrote:
Hunters have to keep the damn pet fed else it runs off

...
Ok, just shut up right there.

Shaolinz wrote:
Warlocks have to do these ridiculously long quests for their abilities, etc etc.

If by "etc etc." you mean Drain Tankage, petzzz, DoTzzz and Fearzzz, then yes. I see your point.
Shaolinz wrote:
The fact that you have to sit down and eat after every two-three mobs is no "weakness" really.

Everyone needs to eat/drink after fighting a while... The fact that we have no effective way to avoid damage, heal ourselves or Crowd Control IS a weakness.



The only thing worse than a whiner is a whiner who doesn't know what he's talking about.


Edit: Rawr.

Edited, Jan 29th 2008 7:39pm by Utarius
#87 Jan 29 2008 at 12:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Oh please.

I leveled a warrior to 60 and it's nowhere as bad as the average warrior player make it out to be.

Keep your gear updated frequently (don't wear stuff 10 level lower then yours - on my warrior, I would run every instance several time until I had all the key drops), fight mobs 2 level lowers then yours, don't be stupid about adds and pull carefully (know when not to charge) and it really isn't much harder then any other class out there.

And it's downright easy if the warrior is an alt and you can gear him with blue/twink gear. My level 23 Warrior baby alt decimates equal level mobs faster then any other PC I've ever had - that's what happens when your toon has 7 blues and 1100 hp at that level I guess.

Oh, and once you reach a higher enough level, Recklessness + Sweeping Strike is an incredible 'oh ****' button.

Yeah, you don't have any escaping ability. Yeah, when you do a bad pulls, you're more likely to die then a lot of the other class in the game (which doesn't mean you will die. Running away with a shield + Defensive Stance helps). But in the greater scheme of thing, 10-20 more death from 1 to 70 doesn't account for it being 'Hell'. If you're doing a lot more then that... then the problem's with you.

Edited, Jan 29th 2008 3:04pm by Tyrandor
#88 Jan 29 2008 at 12:20 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,395 posts
Warchief Tyrandor wrote:
Oh please.

I leveled a warrior to 60 and it's nowhere as bad as the average warrior player make it out to be.

Keep your gear updated frequently (don't wear stuff 10 level lower then yours - on my warrior, I would run every instance several time until I had all the key drops), fight mobs 2 level lowers then yours, don't be stupid about adds and pull carefully (know when not to charge) and it really isn't much harder then any other class out there.

I've never said anything other than this. In fact, I've never even said warriors are hard to level. Merely harder than all the other classes (yes, rogues too).

You also have to take into consideration that a lot of players don't instance, whether it is because they don't know how to tank (and therefore get kicked) or because they fancy the faster way of leveling (questing).

Warchief Tyrandor wrote:
Oh, and once you reach a higher enough level, Recklessness + Sweeping Strike is an incredible 'oh sh*t' button.

Don't even count an ability with a CD longer than 5 mins as an "oh ****" ability... While Sweeping Strikes in conjunction with Cleave is very good while fighting several mobs, it's still comparable to Blade Flurry, even though BF has a longer CD.

Edit: Grr.

Edited, Jan 29th 2008 9:21pm by Utarius
#89 Jan 29 2008 at 12:48 PM Rating: Good
*****
13,048 posts
Tromo wrote:
Warriors need difficulty. There needs to be a bigger difference between the crappy warriors and the good warriors.

They can play effectively into the tops of bg's by mindlessly mashing Intercept, Hamstring and MS. Maybe a SS and then Execute. The good ones actually change stances and use spell reflect. This results in a semi-skilled druid being able to carry a keyboard-turning warrior into the 2k's. It's ridiculous.

You compare this to what a rogue, mage, priest, or god forbid what a Shaman has to do, and it's easymode for Warriors.


Edited, Jan 28th 2008 3:17pm by Tromo

There's a large difference between good warriors and bad warriors. If you don't know this, you're bad yourself.

I've dueled warriors in full S3 on my realm and gotten smashed. I've also dueled ones with full mixed arena gear and smashed them because they were bad.

Smashed doesn't mean I had like 10% HP left, it was more like I had 60% HP left.

But yeah. Just like with any other class, there's a large difference between the bads and the skilled.
#90 Jan 29 2008 at 12:51 PM Rating: Good
It doesn't matter which class is harder to level. It really doesn't. Is a Warrior harder to level than a Rogue? Well... yeah. They're more gear dependent, they have fewer escape options that aren't on insanely long timers, and they have no way to bypass mobs when questing.

But that shouldn't have any impact on end-game PvP balance, at all. It's an awful argument in support of anything, especially since they've made leveling even easier now.
#91 Jan 29 2008 at 12:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
But that shouldn't have any impact on end-game PvP balance, at all. It's an awful argument in support of anything, especially since they've made leveling even easier now.


That. :)

Edited, Jan 29th 2008 3:56pm by Tyrandor
#92 Jan 29 2008 at 1:07 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
RP sorta agreed with a point I made!

Do I still phail?
#93 Jan 30 2008 at 9:12 AM Rating: Good
Shaolinz wrote:
RP sorta agreed with a point I made!

Do I still phail?


Yes.

Also, since I can't believe I missed this the first time;

Quote:
You're no "god" yourself bro, just because you've got that warglaive doesn't make you a know-it-all bad ***.


I've been a golden god since long before I got a Warglaive.
#94 Jan 30 2008 at 9:33 AM Rating: Default
It's a well known fact that all the skilled players chose warriors and the noobs picked other classes.
RP's word is law.
Hell if RP told me the earth was square i'd be noddin' and agree'in
#95 Jan 30 2008 at 10:21 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts

Quote:
I've been a golden god since long before I got a Warglaive.


I think I may have remembered reading about you in mythology...
#96 Jan 30 2008 at 10:27 AM Rating: Good
***
1,006 posts
#97 Jan 30 2008 at 10:50 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,580 posts
EonSprinter wrote:


Though now instead of holding **** beads he's holding a warglaive.
#98 Jan 30 2008 at 1:56 PM Rating: Good
****
8,779 posts
AND **** beads.
#99 Jan 30 2008 at 9:44 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
That was my last allah accomplishment I was hoping for:

For RPzip to agree with me and to get quoted in someone's signature. I can die peacefully now.
#100 Jan 30 2008 at 10:30 PM Rating: Decent
I would just like to include my opionins in this. Just becuase i post them dont mean they are right.
I would like to point out that yes, to rogues warriors are tough to beat but so are pallies with the recent updates. this, i believe, is not because warriors are overpowered or that rogues are weak but rather because they are "hard" target whereas rogues are geared to kill cloth, leather, and mail wearers, which we excel at. i dont want to turn this into rogue vs. warrior althought it seems like it already is, this is just something id like to point out.

Secondly warriors are tough to fight i have a priest and even though thier pvp requires you to make attacks with flawless timing as one mistake will doom you they are weaker against warriors.

i dont want to condemn warriors as they are well suited to Blizzard apparently wanted them to be i.e. high Dps one hit attackers like rogues and spriests breakers( instead of frost mages and such that root, slow and more slowly dps down thier targets relying more on then not touching them). i think they could use some ...not WEAKENING so much as some TWEAKING so that they have to be more specialized to one job either tanking, cc, dps, or support. Again these are just my OPIONINS so dont act like they are completely right or wrong, these are mearly my points of veiw on this subject.
#101 Jan 31 2008 at 9:50 AM Rating: Decent
I'm going to weigh in on RPZip's side here. Well, sort of his side. A side which is parallel, at any rate.

The popularity of a class in arena is not tied solely to how *OP* it is, and thus a flat out nerf is not going to achieve the desired result. I think there are several reasons Warriors are popular in arena, including but not limited to:

1) The class itself is easy to play at a competent level (especially in arena), just like the Warlock. It may, just like the Warlock in 3v3 and 5v5, get complex at higher levels, but I cannot say.

1.b)It's more of a passive defence class like Warlock, Paladin etc than an active defence class such as Mage, Rogue or Druid.

2) The Warrior is a staple PvP class. It has been strong throughout tBC and thus there are already plenty of well geared Warriors in arena. Therefore, even if a weaker class (Ret Paladin is a reasonable example - good 3v3 class but unpopular still) was to be buffed to become superior to or on par with it, it's going to take time for the change to take effect.

3) Mortal Strike. Aimed (Mortal) Shot is a ***** to put up. The only competitor is Wound Poison. As a healing debuff is normally important in 3v3 and 5v5 this basically means you'll either want a Rogue or a Warrior in the team (There are exceptions, even FoTM ones, but the majority have one or the other). Getting these two to be exactly equal would be incredibly difficult, as previously mentioned it is not down to brute force alone. How well they synergiSe (British tyvm)with the current FoTM matrices and such plays a large factor too. Of course, you want to be top. Of course, Warriors want to be on top. But one is always going to be a fair bit better than the other.

Anyways, the balance is delicate, and I suspect your proposed change would break the scales. Rogues have a great deal of benefits Warriors do not, just as Warriors have benefits you do not. (This is more for Shaolinz than Tyr).

These include increased control over the target you are dpsing, superior CC to those you are not dpsing and greatly increased mobility (as ShS). Additionally, as ShS, you have better survivability vs non melee than Warriors (yes, even the ones that know how to def stance, reflect and turtle the burst). As Mutilate, you have better burst dps than a Warrior (for reals). I assume you can see the weaknesses of your class for yourself.

Shaolinz, your opinion is horribly outdated. That post made me want to rend flesh, especially as a Mage. You know what pisses me off most in ALL of WoW? Post-patch Hunters. They aren't weak at all anymore.

BTW, Tyr, Rogues cannot kill people in 5s?

I guess the words "Renataki" and "Mutilate" would mean nothing to you.


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 225 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (225)