·Theme
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- Blue Post
Blue PostFollow
Hey has anyone seen a blue post on the O boards as to the reasoning behind the flurry nerf?
* In regard to Deathwish and Enrage-
This change was made in order to lower the burst damage of a warrior. The stronger effect should take precedent, which means that Deathwish should override Enrage.
* In regard to the Flurry change-
In internal testing, fury warrior is out-damaging rogues, however, shamans and arms warriors are not. As such, we needed to reduce fury warrior damage, and the method chosen was to reduce the effectiveness of Flurry.
* In regard to the change to the Insignia of the Alliance/Horde and Medallion of the Alliance/Horde changes-
We felt that the ability to remove Polymorph was the most beneficial to warriors.
The DW and enrage not stacking anymore, ok I can see that.
The trinket change, what the hell is up with that.
The flurry change, so basically we were nerfed cause of the rogue inferiority complex again?
Edited, May 11th 2007 3:22pm by Jimpadan
Warriors were always gear dependent. They made the DPS gear in BC too good?
Possible. I still contend that Rogues are self proclaimed dps masters as opposed to being intended that way.
Hell even in the class descriptions it's kinda implied.
Warriors are described as masters of melee combat. Rogues are described as masters of stealth and deception.
Hell even in the class descriptions it's kinda implied.
Warriors are described as masters of melee combat. Rogues are described as masters of stealth and deception.
They should have given Rogues some variant on Misdirection and other similar skills to make them happier... that, or some sort of effective mob debuff as an innate class skill. It fits with the class description much more than "best single target damage" ever will.
Rogues have always had an inferiority complex when compared to warriors. IF geared right were supperior to them in both PVE and PVP. But they dont realize how hard these warriors work to get that way. Just because the rogues in general arent as motivated to make something of their class....because its sitting fat and happy already doesnt mean you should nerf the class thats being played to its fullest potential by a skilled core of pv p/e ers. And unless youv gone through the pain of lvling a warrior to 70 through nerf after nerf(for the last 1 1/2 years) you have no idea of how much these people deserve it.
Edited, May 12th 2007 3:03am by Darkmessiah
Edited, May 12th 2007 3:03am by Darkmessiah
Yha that would be down right logical Zip. But we're talking about the blizz developers here so thats out.
Guess it's the age old addage "the squeeky wheel gets the grease". Since rogues are by far one of the most played classes (second only to hunter I believe).
Guess it's the age old addage "the squeeky wheel gets the grease". Since rogues are by far one of the most played classes (second only to hunter I believe).
It's something similar, I think, to what's happening to priests. Most of the rogues' utility abilities (such as stuns and most poison effects) aren't as useful in a raid context. As such, all rogues have going for them is damage; and if warriors are beating them in damage while wearing plate armor, it makes more sense to take warriors, neh? So Blizzard decided to nerf warriors so that rogues can hang on to the upper damage spots.
The ongoing priest debate is along the same lines. Other classes have gotten to the point where they heal just as well or better than priests, yet offer more utility with better protection. Priests have been asking for two things: If we don't have utility, make us the top healers. Or, give us better utility so that it makes sense to bring more than one priest. Instead, Blizzard chose to nerf paladins.
The ongoing priest debate is along the same lines. Other classes have gotten to the point where they heal just as well or better than priests, yet offer more utility with better protection. Priests have been asking for two things: If we don't have utility, make us the top healers. Or, give us better utility so that it makes sense to bring more than one priest. Instead, Blizzard chose to nerf paladins.
Good point. Blizz is quick to swing the nerf bat instead of actually fixing what is wrong.
The priest/paladin arguement is usually met with paladins are great single target healers but have no HoTs or aoe heals.
The rogue/warrior arguement is usually met with warriors can do just as much dps and if **** hits the fan they can tank.
I can't speak for the preist/paladin arguement but as far as the rogue/warrior one goes. A warrior, along with every other class, can only swap main hand and off hand weapons/shields while in combat. A warrior in dps gear with just a shield on won't last any longer than a rogue that is evasion tanking. I know, I've done it.
Sure we can pop shieldwall but it doesn't last any longer than a rogue's evasion. People that argue that because we wear plate means we are insta-tanks are ill informed. The only thing a dps warrior can do once the fight starts is dps.
I do agree however that blizz should fix the real problem and give rogues back their utility instead of just swinging the nerf bat again and again.
The priest/paladin arguement is usually met with paladins are great single target healers but have no HoTs or aoe heals.
The rogue/warrior arguement is usually met with warriors can do just as much dps and if **** hits the fan they can tank.
I can't speak for the preist/paladin arguement but as far as the rogue/warrior one goes. A warrior, along with every other class, can only swap main hand and off hand weapons/shields while in combat. A warrior in dps gear with just a shield on won't last any longer than a rogue that is evasion tanking. I know, I've done it.
Sure we can pop shieldwall but it doesn't last any longer than a rogue's evasion. People that argue that because we wear plate means we are insta-tanks are ill informed. The only thing a dps warrior can do once the fight starts is dps.
I do agree however that blizz should fix the real problem and give rogues back their utility instead of just swinging the nerf bat again and again.
Anyone else notice that there hasn't been a blue reply on the PTR thread on the O boards since the thread was made? 3 weeks and nothing? Where's the love /sigh
Wow, just stumbled across here by chance. I hate to be a real jerk but:
replace "rogue" and "warrior" with "warrior" and "druid" and you get the druid forums a patch ago, when we were told to suck up nerfs for the good of class balance.
replace "rogue" and "warrior" with "warrior" and "druid" and you get the druid forums a patch ago, when we were told to suck up nerfs for the good of class balance.
The reason you were told to deal with the nerf was cause you had arms warrior dmg and prot warrior mitigation.
The biggest nerf (DW and enrage not stacking anymore) isn't what most people are upset about. Hell I admit that is a bit much and needed to be toned down.
What most people are upset about are the trinket change (poly isn't near as much of a threat to warriors as slowing effects are) and the flurry change (totally unwarrented).
The biggest nerf (DW and enrage not stacking anymore) isn't what most people are upset about. Hell I admit that is a bit much and needed to be toned down.
What most people are upset about are the trinket change (poly isn't near as much of a threat to warriors as slowing effects are) and the flurry change (totally unwarrented).
Quote:
What most people are upset about are the trinket change (poly isn't near as much of a threat to warriors as slowing effects are) and the flurry change (totally unwarrented).
Justifying it would be; charge, intercept and intervene all break slow, and ignore slowing effects.
All in all, poly or cyclone both CC a warrior out of the fight, long enough to get a foot up. I say the trinket should break all forms of CC. Everyone should get one CC break per 5 minutes.
::EDIT::
So in essence we are 'gaining' something, not losing anything. Gain the ability to remove poly, and keep slowing effects off with skills not trinkets.
Edited, May 16th 2007 1:10pm by devioususer
Quote:
The rogue/warrior arguement is usually met with warriors can do just as much dps and if sh*t hits the fan they can tank.
Yeah.... about that. Do you dps in tank gear? No dps warrior should be wearing any defense gear. It should be DPS DPS DPS DPS DPS DPS DPS. Not 1/10th DPS and prot gear.
DPS warriors do not tank raids or heroics, in dps gear.
If sh*t hits the fans, can you change your gear in combat? No.
Quote:
Justifying it would be; charge, intercept and intervene all break slow, and ignore slowing effects.
But intercept, charge and intervene do not break slowing effects. They just suppress them, they will be there as soon as you reach your target. I have tried it on the ptr. It is absolutely horrible.
devi wrote:
Yeah.... about that. Do you dps in tank gear? No dps warrior should be wearing any defense gear. It should be DPS DPS DPS DPS DPS DPS DPS. Not 1/10th DPS and prot gear.
DPS warriors do not tank raids or heroics, in dps gear.
If sh*t hits the fans, can you change your gear in combat? No.
DPS warriors do not tank raids or heroics, in dps gear.
If sh*t hits the fans, can you change your gear in combat? No.
Read the entire post devi.
And for charge/intercept/intervene, what ForeverFallout said.
Re-Read:
And I still have the same opinion.
You say warriors, all the time, can't tank as dps. I said in Raid and Heroics.
And I still have the same opinion.
You say warriors, all the time, can't tank as dps. I said in Raid and Heroics.
nerfs suck, but:
3.8/1.3 = 2.92
3.8/1.25 = 3.04
2.7/1.3 = 2.08
2.7/1.25 = 2.16
1.6/1.3 = 1.23
1.6/1.25 = 1.28
1.25/1.3 = 96.15%
it's basically a 3.85% nerf to 50% of your damage 80% of the time.
i really don't think it's going to make that big a difference. if you were going 50/50 against a rogue for the top spot, now he's going to take it 80% of the time, maybe. it would be like if you had forgotten to spend that last talent point in flurry or something. ok that was pretty bad. but it is like they're taking a talent point away from flurry builds.
i think the enrage/deathwish nerf is far worse, where if you take a crit in pvp, enrage erases your dw fear immunity.
3.8/1.3 = 2.92
3.8/1.25 = 3.04
2.7/1.3 = 2.08
2.7/1.25 = 2.16
1.6/1.3 = 1.23
1.6/1.25 = 1.28
1.25/1.3 = 96.15%
it's basically a 3.85% nerf to 50% of your damage 80% of the time.
i really don't think it's going to make that big a difference. if you were going 50/50 against a rogue for the top spot, now he's going to take it 80% of the time, maybe. it would be like if you had forgotten to spend that last talent point in flurry or something. ok that was pretty bad. but it is like they're taking a talent point away from flurry builds.
i think the enrage/deathwish nerf is far worse, where if you take a crit in pvp, enrage erases your dw fear immunity.
I haven't played on the PTR, but my understanding was that the tooltips/abilities stack but the damage increase does not.
So, from what I understand. If you have Deathwish up and get crit, enrage will still pop up and you're still fear immune for the duration of Deathwish, but you only get 1x 25% damage instead of 2x 25%.
If that's not how Blizz "fixed" it, then they did it wrong.
So, from what I understand. If you have Deathwish up and get crit, enrage will still pop up and you're still fear immune for the duration of Deathwish, but you only get 1x 25% damage instead of 2x 25%.
If that's not how Blizz "fixed" it, then they did it wrong.
devi wrote:
You say warriors, all the time, can't tank as dps. I said in Raid and Heroics.
Yup in non-heroic non-raid instances a dps warrior can tank "well enough" by throwing a shield on. The topic, however, is raid utility.
axhed wrote:
i think the enrage/deathwish nerf is far worse, where if you take a crit in pvp, enrage erases your dw fear immunity.
Enrage doesn't overwrite deathwish. You get the full benefit of deathwish for its duration. If you are crit enrage will pop but it will have no effect as a stronger buff is already in place, aka deathwish.
I do agree that the flurry nerf isn't huge but it is another nail in the coffen. Just add it to the long line of nerfs we have already received.
I still have a major problem with the trinket change. The devs have still yet to explain thier motives other than saying "we feel the ability to remove poly will benefit warriors greater than the ability to remove slowing effects."
well that's good, i guess they changed the enrage/dw thing then
A few weeks ago Enrage would overwrite Death Wish on the PTR, but I havent' been back in a bit to check if that's still the case or not.
It doesn't make sense either way. Deathwish gives 20% increase to damage and fear immunity as well as making you take 5% more damage. Enrage is just a straight 25% more damage. If enrage pops up and im not fighting a warlock, i don't want deathwish to take precedence. But i can't cancel deathwish because it is a debuff. Why should 2 talents that are so close together and REQUIRED for the other major fury talents not be stackable? I understand that ms warriors are doing too much damage with them. But instead of taking this half assed route to appease these other classes why aren't they addressing the bigger problem? The fury tree needs a hell of a lot of work.
Edited, May 17th 2007 2:38pm by ForeverFallout
Edited, May 17th 2007 2:38pm by ForeverFallout
Just my personnal opinion but switching enrage and dual weild specilization's spots in the fury tree would be a step in the right direction.
Enrage is required to get flurry. Flurry being a PvE talent there is no point in having enrage be a prereq as your not going to be getting hit (all things going as they should) in PvE.
Both dual weild spec and flurry are PvE talents. So logically they should be the ones that are prereqed for each other.
It's not much but its a start in the right direction.
Enrage is required to get flurry. Flurry being a PvE talent there is no point in having enrage be a prereq as your not going to be getting hit (all things going as they should) in PvE.
Both dual weild spec and flurry are PvE talents. So logically they should be the ones that are prereqed for each other.
It's not much but its a start in the right direction.
Recent Visitors: 53
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (53)
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- Blue Post
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC