Blood DK tanks Dual Weilding?

100 Blood Elf Death Knight
12905
10/31/2012 09:08 AMPosted by Ezikeo
Two words "Parry Haste"

hasnt existed for a long time
Reply Quote
90 Worgen Death Knight
8175
It will let you build Scent of Blood faster, I don't use Omen anymore so I don't know how astronomically high a tanks threat is compared to DPS, but if it's anything like cata then the threat loss wouldn't matter.

DPS loss might matter.
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Death Knight
12905
It will let you build Scent of Blood faster, I don't use Omen anymore so I don't know how astronomically high a tanks threat is compared to DPS, but if it's anything like cata then the threat loss wouldn't matter.

DPS loss might matter.

scent of blood has a chance not to proc at all with dw to equalize this between dw and 2h. you'll average about the same amount of scent of blood stacks as a 2h blood.

threat has been irrelevant for a long time.

the pointless dps loss is the only reason you shouldnt be dual wielding
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Death Knight
15410
It will let you build Scent of Blood faster, I don't use Omen anymore so I don't know how astronomically high a tanks threat is compared to DPS, but if it's anything like cata then the threat loss wouldn't matter.

DPS loss might matter.

scent of blood has a chance not to proc at all with dw to equalize this between dw and 2h. you'll average about the same amount of scent of blood stacks as a 2h blood.

threat has been irrelevant for a long time.

the pointless dps loss is the only reason you shouldnt be dual wielding


well and the general less amount of overall stats (stam and strength) since generally it's a loss as dual wield compared to a 2 hander.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Death Knight
15410
10/31/2012 11:27 AMPosted by Ezikeo

hasnt existed for a long time


I'm sure it hasn't been removed. Also DW as a tank increases mobs/bosses chance to parry an attack, hence adding more dmg you take.


Eluding again to parry-hasting that practically ended with illidan. The main reason we all can dualwield is the interrogation quest in the starting area and so we all have the ability though only frost has supporting passives and abilities.
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Death Knight
0
nm
Edited by Cowntchokula on 10/31/2012 11:36 AM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Death Knight
12905
10/31/2012 11:27 AMPosted by Ezikeo

hasnt existed for a long time


I'm sure it hasn't been removed. Also DW as a tank increases mobs/bosses chance to parry an attack, hence adding more dmg you take.
parry hasting has been removed since they started removing it in ICC. very few bosses actually still have it and they are all outdated content.

since cata not a single boss fight has had parryhasting as the mechanic forced tanks to stack expertise or healers to spam heal the tank or risk him getting instagibbed.

its no longer around and therefore not a valid reason as i stated before
Reply Quote
86 Human Death Knight
905
Eluding again to parry-hasting that practically ended with illidan. The main reason we all can dualwield is the interrogation quest in the starting area and so we all have the ability though only frost has supporting passives and abilities.


I remember that quest, and thinking how awesome those swords were. I was going to really enjoy being a dw tank... :-(

I dunno, maybe it's a Freudian thing. I don't need a bigger stick, I just want to hit twice as much.
Reply Quote
90 Human Death Knight
13075
11/02/2012 01:28 AMPosted by Jastreo
Eluding again to parry-hasting that practically ended with illidan. The main reason we all can dualwield is the interrogation quest in the starting area and so we all have the ability though only frost has supporting passives and abilities.


I remember that quest, and thinking how awesome those swords were. I was going to really enjoy being a dw tank... :-(

I dunno, maybe it's a Freudian thing. I don't need a bigger stick, I just want to hit twice as much.

I know!! It looked so cool, and we had rune forges for it.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Death Knight
15410
11/02/2012 06:13 AMPosted by Babelon


I remember that quest, and thinking how awesome those swords were. I was going to really enjoy being a dw tank... :-(

I dunno, maybe it's a Freudian thing. I don't need a bigger stick, I just want to hit twice as much.

I know!! It looked so cool, and we had rune forges for it.


Here is how i remember the interrogation quest every time i've done it. My strikes hit for crap. The mobs would die too early to really do anything and I almost had to spend up to 40 minutes just to get one of them to talk. Though the last time i did it the like 2nd or 3rd one talked so maybe they've upped it's % chance. I have no idea why anyone would use that annoying and slow quest as a reason to be a dw blood. We didn't even really have all our abilities yet to call blood a tank at that point.
Reply Quote
100 Human Death Knight
13930
Kusari, I have a Question for you. What are your educational credentials that qualify you to correct anyone? Especially when you are wrong. The use of the word <Viable> in the context provided, was entirely correct.

Definitions of the word <Viable> include the following:

a: capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately <viable alternatives>

b: capable of existence and development as an independent unit <the colony is now a viable state>

c (1): having a reasonable chance of succeeding <a viable candidate> (2): financially sustainable <a viable enterprise

I suggest you do a little homework before you attempt to correct someone. I make no claims to personal expertise of the english language. However, on this topic, you are wrong.
Edited by Moggar on 11/4/2012 9:37 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Human Death Knight
11090
Kusari, I have a Question for you. What are your educational credentials that qualify you to correct anyone? Especially when you are wrong. The use of the word <Viable> in the context provided, was entirely correct.

Definitions of the word <Viable> include the following:

a: capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately <viable alternatives>

b: capable of existence and development as an independent unit <the colony is now a viable state>

c (1): having a reasonable chance of succeeding <a viable candidate> (2): financially sustainable <a viable enterprise

I suggest you do a little homework before you attempt to correct someone. I make no claims to personal expertise of the english language. However, on this topic, you are wrong.


Cool story bro.
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Death Knight
8920
If you are using the strict definition of "viable", than pretty much anything is "viable". An int stacking DK tank could be carried through content, which makes it "viable". Just saying "DW tanking is viable" out of context is taken by many players to mean "DW tanking works so go for it". The people who say "DW tanking isn't viable" phrase it this way intentionally because we don't want any confusion as to just how much you should not under any circumstances DW tank, just like how we'd say stacking int as a DK tank "isn't viable". In other words, in this context we are taking liberties with the strict definition of the word for the sake of clarity of our message, which is don't DW tank.
Edited by Reniat on 11/4/2012 10:29 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Blood Elf Death Knight
12905
Kusari, I have a Question for you. What are your educational credentials that qualify you to correct anyone? Especially when you are wrong. The use of the word <Viable> in the context provided, was entirely correct.

Definitions of the word <Viable> include the following:

a: capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately <viable alternatives>

b: capable of existence and development as an independent unit <the colony is now a viable state>

c (1): having a reasonable chance of succeeding <a viable candidate> (2): financially sustainable <a viable enterprise

I suggest you do a little homework before you attempt to correct someone. I make no claims to personal expertise of the english language. However, on this topic, you are wrong.

i corrected the person because the said dual wield tanking is not viable. by the definitions you provided in your post you have furthered my point. dual wield tanking CAN be done. You CAN dual wield tank and succesfully tank a raid or dungeon. it is VIABLE just not OPTIMAL.

dw tanking can be done succesfully and the ONLY cost is personal dps and if tank dps is a problem for your raid unless you are pushing hardmodes or world firsts it shouldnt matter. mitigational gains and losses are trivial, healing intake differences are trivial. threat has been a nonissue since cata.

i am not advocating people to dual wield tank. im not saying its better because its not. its simply not as horrid as people on this forum make it out to be.
Edited by Kusari on 11/4/2012 10:28 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Pandaren Monk
13655
DW tanking provides very valuable information.
It lets me know right away i should vote kick the tank.
Reply Quote
100 Human Death Knight
13930
My question was simple... and only in regards to your comment about the misuse of the word, which was inaccurate.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Death Knight
15410
No, Kusari is actually right. Viable is not a word that should be applied to dual wield blood tanks. Players seem to only use the word "viable" because Ghost Crawler used the word on his twitter. Optimal is really the word to use and actually based on GC's comments about wanting blood to be 2 handed? I bet if they could find a way to nerf dual wield tanking to the point of oblivion without it affecting dw frost then the devs would have done it already.
Edited by Tor on 11/5/2012 9:05 AM PST
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]