Overlord Theophany wrote:
Gaudion wrote:
And man... just look at Ret Pallies. Ret Pallies needed help in pretty much every area since way before TBC released. But it still took them two whole years and into an expansion...
It's barely been a year and a half since TBC was released, Gaudion.
Re-read that and try again.
Quote:
And actually, warlocks are on the decline in PvP, which is to say they're coming back in line with a lot of other classes instead of being one of the front-runners with SL/SL.
'Locks are still one of the top three represented DPS-ers in any arena bracket, or at least they were the last time I checked. They've "declined" to the point that they're roughly even or a little below Rogues and Warriors in most brackets, but all three classes synergize differently with certain partners and that just happens to favor Rogues and Warriors most at the moment. Which is perfectly fine, I'm not saying 'Locks (or Rogues or Warriors) are OP now, but my point still stands. They've enjoyed rarely-contested dominance since way, way before TBC released, and they're still very, very strong. But it hasn't stopped them from whining for buffs non-stop.
Quote:
Honestly, yes, shamans need some work in PvP. A limited CC, a snare break for the enhancement (after watching Zagine 3 it'd be nice, but with a good team not required), would bring shamans back in line with other classes, but honestly, shamans are already a pretty powerful class in PvP. I don't want this to turn into another flame thread with you whining at me, so I'll leave it there.
I like how it's "me whining at you" instead of me defending myself and my class when
you came into
my class' forum claiming Shaman are perfectly fine and telling us all that we suck. (Clearly, all the flames must be
my fault as well. You would never deign to such things.) I'm going to let that "already a pretty powerful class in PvP" line slide since I have no desire to start you on another crusade to prove you're right. In any case, it's nice to finally see you at least come forward and admit that Shaman could still use at least a little tweaking. If you had managed to be even half that reasonable on any of your previous crusades, we might have had a much better working relationship. I'm not about to bow down and worship you for being right like your flunkies do on the Rogue forums, but I'm more than willing to meet you half-way.
Quote:
Balance and feral, if you've taken a look at their talent trees in WotLK, will be just fine in PvP; so much that my brother and my feral/rogue team will be fairly unstoppable versus all the comps we currently have problems with (i.e. Berserk vs Locks = lolz).
Assuming those trees are even correct. Blizzard hasn't released "official" trees for us to drool over yet, and there's still the rest of alpha and the entire duration of beta for those to be adjusted. I wouldn't start drawing any conclusions just yet, and either way it's immaterial to the matter at hand.
Quote:
Honestly you were misguided when you said balance needs to be looked at; it's more feral that needs attention. When there are ~50 druids in the US that have broken 2k as feral, the spec is fairly broken in arena.
Uh... I'm not talking about the 13/11/37 build. I'm talking about the 41/0/20 pure Balance builds. Feral needs a lot of attention to be sure, but playing a Balance Druid in PvP is no picnic. In fact, most of the time it plays out very similiar to an Elemental Shaman; they can do a ton of damage and they've got a lot of armor. Unlike a Shaman they've got a lot of control, but they lack a spell interrupt (or absorb) so they get decimated by casters, and also like Shaman they're retardly easy to shut down and heal through. They can wreak havoc if they can get lost in a crowd (5v5 and BG's), but they're questionable in 3v3, worthless in 2v2, and a joke against most opponents 1v1.
Edited, Jun 8th 2008 3:14pm by Gaudion
