Blizzard, proposed fix to warriors.

90 Undead Death Knight
7605
No more TfB procs while in defensive stance. Also, going defensive stance immediately causes all stacks of TfB to fall off.

This fixes everything. Second wind is no longer as big a problem because if they go defensive to get that extra -25% damage, they lose their stacks and aren't gaining any (all they really do is delay the inevitable).

It also fixes their insane burst. If you see 2 TfB stacks on the warrior, you can at least tunnel him to force defensive stance to survive. If his partners peel properly or he decides to keep fighting in battle or zerker stance and risk imminent death, he can keep the stacks, if not he loses them and along with it his near-future burst potential.

Risk/Reward rather than sitting in defensive stance all game fishing for TfB procs and waiting for a chance to use your 1 shot macro.

Blizzard already said they don't want warriors sitting in defensive stance the whole game, this seems to fix that without much downside for PvP and ZERO downside for PvE.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
4560
This is actually a rather good idea!
Reply Quote
100 Pandaren Warrior
16670
Except for the part where in PVE Warriors are actually using defensive stance to mitgate raid damage such as but not limited to, Crush on Garalon, Force and Verve on Zor'lok, Rain of Blades on Wind Lord, ect.

Effecting that would give raids more of reason to not bring an already hurting DPS spec already. Please no.
Edited by Curoar on 12/11/2012 5:54 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Human Warrior
10020
Except for the part where in PVE Warriors are actually using defensive stance to mitgate raid damage such as but not limited to, Crush on Garalon, Force and Verve on Zor'lok, Rain of Blades on Wind Lord, ect.

Effecting that would give raids more of reason to not bring an already hurting DPS spec already. Please no.
I think the solution is obvious then: Arms gets a -25% damage taken buff in all stances!

Bam, we can implement the OP's idea, AND help them out in PvE!

(I'm wondering if anyone will see the sarcasm. Short-sighted fixes cause more problems than they solve.)
Edited by Massivecow on 12/11/2012 6:08 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
4560
Except for the part where in PVE Warriors are actually using defensive stance to mitgate raid damage such as but not limited to, Crush on Garalon, Force and Verve on Zor'lok, Rain of Blades on Wind Lord, ect.

Effecting that would give raids more of reason to not bring an already hurting DPS spec already. Please no.

It's fairly common for defensive cooldowns to reduce or even completely stop your ability to do damage - not exactly a unique situation to be in. The closest analogue is Blood Presence - see how much they lose going from Frost to Blood? I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for Warriors to suffer similar penalties.
Reply Quote
100 Pandaren Warrior
16670
Except for the part where in PVE Warriors are actually using defensive stance to mitgate raid damage such as but not limited to, Crush on Garalon, Force and Verve on Zor'lok, Rain of Blades on Wind Lord, ect.

Effecting that would give raids more of reason to not bring an already hurting DPS spec already. Please no.

It's fairly common for defensive cooldowns to reduce or even completely stop your ability to do damage - not exactly a unique situation to be in. The closest analogue is Blood Presence - see how much they lose going from Frost to Blood? I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for Warriors to suffer similar penalties.


We do suffer penalties. It's called rage generation. Outside of Mortal Strike, we gain 1 rage per second which is a huge DPS loss. Meanwhile in Battle Stance we gain rage based on each auto attack we do. Which is around 12 rage. Considering the average melee swing is 3.6 Seconds.... well you get the idea. Your damage output is already crap in defensive stance, why hurt it even more?
Reply Quote
85 Gnome Priest
0
You are supposed to suffer large penalties for trying to turtle in Defensive Stance. Frost Death Knights lose Frost Strike's cost reduction and Unholy loses the increased rune regeneration speed. Having access to nearly your full dps rotation and an incredibly powerful passive buff while having a rather hefty damage reduction is very powerful.
Reply Quote
100 Human Warrior
14560
12/11/2012 06:37 PMPosted by Aiztam
You are supposed to suffer large penalties for trying to turtle in Defensive Stance. Frost Death Knights lose Frost Strike's cost reduction and Unholy loses the increased rune regeneration speed. Having access to nearly your full dps rotation and an incredibly powerful passive buff while having a rather hefty damage reduction is very powerful.


Actually both of those resource costs sound pretty similar to warriors losing roughly half of their rage generation. I thought the penalty for DKs was much harsher.
Reply Quote
80 Human Priest
3225
12/11/2012 07:24 PMPosted by Secondwind
You are supposed to suffer large penalties for trying to turtle in Defensive Stance. Frost Death Knights lose Frost Strike's cost reduction and Unholy loses the increased rune regeneration speed. Having access to nearly your full dps rotation and an incredibly powerful passive buff while having a rather hefty damage reduction is very powerful.


Actually both of those resource costs sound pretty similar to warriors losing roughly half of their rage generation. I thought the penalty for DKs was much harsher.


DKs also lost all RP when switching stances, and tons of other abilities for example...

Frost DKs lose...

All RP when switching stances unless glyphed
Frost Strike goes from 20RP to a 35RP cost
Frost loses -20% CC duration

All that for a crappy 10% damage reduction gg!

No more TfB procs while in defensive stance. Also, going defensive stance immediately causes all stacks of TfB to fall off.

This fixes everything. Second wind is no longer as big a problem because if they go defensive to get that extra -25% damage, they lose their stacks and aren't gaining any (all they really do is delay the inevitable).

It also fixes their insane burst. If you see 2 TfB stacks on the warrior, you can at least tunnel him to force defensive stance to survive. If his partners peel properly or he decides to keep fighting in battle or zerker stance and risk imminent death, he can keep the stacks, if not he loses them and along with it his near-future burst potential.

Risk/Reward rather than sitting in defensive stance all game fishing for TfB procs and waiting for a chance to use your 1 shot macro.

Blizzard already said they don't want warriors sitting in defensive stance the whole game, this seems to fix that without much downside for PvP and ZERO downside for PvE.


This is a amazing, and shockingly well thought out idea. It's extremely good.
Reply Quote
90 Orc Shaman
8030
Or take the cheap route and make it a -10% damage reduction in PVP.
Reply Quote
90 Undead Death Knight
7605
Except for the part where in PVE Warriors are actually using defensive stance to mitgate raid damage such as but not limited to, Crush on Garalon, Force and Verve on Zor'lok, Rain of Blades on Wind Lord, ect.

Effecting that would give raids more of reason to not bring an already hurting DPS spec already. Please no.


So time your heroic strike stack dumps with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a warrior instead of getting the best of both tanks and DPS all the time.
Reply Quote
Liked.
Reply Quote
100 Human Warlock
19105
So time your heroic strike stack dumps with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a warrior instead of getting the best of both tanks and DPS all the time.

Yeah, true.

Maybe DKs should lose all their RP and pause Rune refresh when using AMS. Then you could time your resource usage with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a DK instead of getting the best of both tank and DPS all the time.
Reply Quote
90 Undead Death Knight
7605
12/12/2012 08:53 AMPosted by Serinicas
So time your heroic strike stack dumps with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a warrior instead of getting the best of both tanks and DPS all the time.

Yeah, true.

Maybe DKs should lose all their RP and pause Rune refresh when using AMS. Then you could time your resource usage with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a DK instead of getting the best of both tank and DPS all the time.


Defensive stance is akin to blood presence (a blood presence that is 150% better), not AMS.

Anyway, looks like they are ripping 2 more stacks of TfB off of the warrior and bringing them down to only 1 stack for pvp in the next patch. I guess Blizzard opted for the cripplingly severe nerf instead of an even-handed one like the one I suggested.

So yeah, I'm glad warriors shoot down every fair and balanced nerf that the community suggests so Blizzard ends up going their own way and turning you into target dummies.

"What is hitting me? Is that a warrior? I'm sorry, I thought it was an 8 year old girl on crutches...."
Edited by Deathcoil on 12/12/2012 10:16 AM PST
Reply Quote
100 Human Warrior
14560
12/12/2012 10:13 AMPosted by Deathcoil

Yeah, true.

Maybe DKs should lose all their RP and pause Rune refresh when using AMS. Then you could time your resource usage with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a DK instead of getting the best of both tank and DPS all the time.


Defensive stance is akin to blood presence (a blood presence that is 150% better), not AMS.

Anyway, looks like they are ripping 2 more stacks of TfB off of the warrior and bringing them down to only 1 stack for pvp in the next patch. I guess Blizzard opted for the cripplingly severe nerf instead of an even-handed one like the one I suggested.

So yeah, I'm glad warriors shoot down every fair and balanced nerf that the community suggests so Blizzard ends up going their own way and turning you into target dummies.

"What is hitting me? Is that a warrior? I'm sorry, I thought it was an 8 year old girl on crutches...."


Worry not, we will still have people crying about warrior damage even after this. There was a Monk on our forums recently complaining because he got hit by slam twice back to back for 100k crits. Shockwave is a pretty common whine target because crits can sometimes hit 80-100k with cooldowns up.

Warriors are really just an easy target for QQ because we don't have a whole lot of smaller hits adding up for our damage, it all comes from a few bigger hits. On top of that we have really low passive crit rates. That adds up to base damage hits needing to be high to maintain sustained dps, which then turns into when we do get strings of crits (usually through Recklessness), it hurts a lot. They could take TFB away completely, people will still complain when they get CS->Shockwave->MS->Slam, all critting at ~100k each and they die.
Reply Quote
100 Pandaren Warrior
16670


Yeah, true.

Maybe DKs should lose all their RP and pause Rune refresh when using AMS. Then you could time your resource usage with the telegraphed boss mechanic. Sounds like it would actually add something to playing a DK instead of getting the best of both tank and DPS all the time.


Defensive stance is akin to blood presence (a blood presence that is 150% better), not AMS.

Anyway, looks like they are ripping 2 more stacks of TfB off of the warrior and bringing them down to only 1 stack for pvp in the next patch. I guess Blizzard opted for the cripplingly severe nerf instead of an even-handed one like the one I suggested.

So yeah, I'm glad warriors shoot down every fair and balanced nerf that the community suggests so Blizzard ends up going their own way and turning you into target dummies.

"What is hitting me? Is that a warrior? I'm sorry, I thought it was an 8 year old girl on crutches...."


Just saying, you're discounting the fact that Blood Presence still increases your Effective HP. You gain Damage Reduction as well as additional Stamina when you switch to Blood Presences.

And the reason we shot you down in this thread is because you're failing to understand how crippled a warrior is when they try and turtle in defensive stance. Any damage out put they're gonna have while turtling in defensive stance is minimal and HIGHLY predictable. Any rage we walk into defensive stance with was from battle or berserker stance.
Edited by Curoar on 12/12/2012 11:50 AM PST
Reply Quote
100 Human Warlock
19105
12/12/2012 10:13 AMPosted by Deathcoil
Defensive stance is akin to blood presence (a blood presence that is 150% better), not AMS.

It doesn't matter what it's akin too; DKs don't need to switch into Blood Presence in PvE because AMS is that good.

You're arguing that PvE Warriors should have to be additionally challenged when trying to minimize damage taken in PvE while using Defensive Stance. For things that Warriors are using Defensive Stance for, $10 says DKs are generally using AMS.
Reply Quote
90 Human Paladin
5640
Defensive stance is akin to blood presence (a blood presence that is 150% better), not AMS.

It doesn't matter what it's akin too; DKs don't need to switch into Blood Presence in PvE because AMS is that good.

You're arguing that PvE Warriors should have to be additionally challenged when trying to minimize damage taken in PvE while using Defensive Stance. For things that Warriors are using Defensive Stance for, $10 says DKs are generally using AMS.


TWO CLASSES DON'T WORK EXACTLY THE SAME WAY BLIZZ NERF PLEASE. AMS =/= Defensive stance =/= Blood Presence. "GUYS MY WARRIOR GETS TO USE RALLYING CRY AND SKULL BANNER WHY DONT I HAVE THAT NERF PLZ."

Plus nerfing defensives over PvE is a joke. Defensive Stance is overpowered in PvP, and Blood Presence is not. I doubt Blizz balances warriors around going defensive stance in raids. Sure, if an spriest started healing in the middle of the raid it might help out healing but the fight wasn't balanced around having your spriests heal.

Like the other guy said I recommend giving warriors a passive -25% damage reduction because defensive stance is clunky and underpowered in PvE.
Edited by Harcken on 12/12/2012 12:50 PM PST
Reply Quote
100 Worgen Warrior
5160
this is actually a pretty good idea

however, i think the issue is that d stance has a flat 25% dmg reduction baked in at all. it was put in because prot warriors were taking too much damage at MoP launch, and i think the fix was sort of heavy handed; leaving pvp warriors the ability to exploit it.

tfb also has its own problems. something with so much rng potential is counter-intuitive to the implied design direction the game has been moving. same thing with rogues paralytic poison, but i digress.

that being said, stances are in a really awkward place right now. i personally don't really understand their function anymore.

imo, remove stances altogether and take the banner functionality to the next level.

edit: as for using D stance in raids. warriors already have defensive cooldowns, and i don't think they are meant to use D stance that way.
Edited by Lightmane on 12/12/2012 1:27 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Undead Death Knight
7605
Defensive stance is akin to blood presence (a blood presence that is 150% better), not AMS.

It doesn't matter what it's akin too; DKs don't need to switch into Blood Presence in PvE because AMS is that good.

You're arguing that PvE Warriors should have to be additionally challenged when trying to minimize damage taken in PvE while using Defensive Stance. For things that Warriors are using Defensive Stance for, $10 says DKs are generally using AMS.


Like I said, moot point. I'm not arguing for my nerf anymore because Blizzard has decided to chop the balls off of Warriors instead of just shortening the sword a little.

My "nerf" was balanced. Blizzard basically decided to remove TfB in PvP, at least the part we felt anyway and ultimately give you nothing in return. So you keep your defensive stance in PvE that you use .00001% of the time as an arms warrior and know that every other class breathes a sigh of relief that arms warriors were just nerfed to the ground.
Edited by Deathcoil on 12/12/2012 1:35 PM 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)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]