Here's my question, Just recently (month or two) I started picking up my arena gear, Going for all epics since i already had more then enough pve experience. I read up a lot on pvp did many bg's before and collected gear for a while, now i'm in full pvp gear and getting quite enough points from my arena teams. What i've noticed tho reading all this theorycraft for warriors is that they alllllll go for arms/fury specs.
As a Ms warrior with endless rage and last stand in my build i survive pretty much anything in my 2's with my pally. I wreck through warriors in full s3 yet i am undergeared to fight them just for the sheer fact they don't spec past mortal strike.
My current spec: http://www.wowhead.com/?talent=LV0xdAboghdioVZf0t
I want to learn why so many people are opposed to survivabily on a warrior as opposed to a bit of extra dps, I just recently tried out arms/fury for flury and I've been pretty rage starved the whole time even tho i read up on what skills to use to avoid this, In all honesty improved mortal strike gives me more overall damage then flurry imo.
The 1 seconds cool down and 5% more damage helps a lot when dpsing anyone specially sword spec burst damage mortal strike + crit is pretty much a game winner, usually after a combo like that my pally silences healer or i intercept/pummel the healer and it's gg.
I run at 1700 in 2's and 1600+ in 3's , had a bit of bad luck this week in 3's but considering i'm on rampage battlegroup (everyone over 1600 rating is in full s3) i think my 2's does pretty well.
Does anyone have any experience with this build? Why flurry i think overall full arms works much better. Has there just been a lack of people using this build to notice that it can be viable and even triumph many flurry builds? Looking for oppinions, flame away.