PTR Feedback seems pointless. =/

Q u o t e:
You guys are kinda missing the point.

They changed the trinket because they thought they were helping us, they thought it was more benefitial to break Polymorph, go to the link in the first post of my thread, they explained the major 2.1 changes, and one of the explanations was that the PvP Trinket change is good for us.

Warrior feedback is telling them that the PvP Trinket change is in fact NOT good for us, and it would be better if they kept it as a Slowing effect remove vs Polymorph.

It's not a case of them nerfing and balancing classes, it's a case of them trying to give us a mini-buff and being off-base. Feedback is telling them they're wrong, but they're ignoring it, do you see the problem there?

I honestly do feel this is a buff to the trinket.

Warriors play the slowing game very well with hamstring or piercing howl. You're slowed, they're slowed... it's generally not that bad of a scenario. If the target slips out of melee range, intercept gives you a pretty good shot at getting back within range so you can be mutually slowed (especially after the fix where you aren't slowed while intercepting).

Also, in most cases where the target can slip away again, they can usually immediately re-apply their slowing effect anyways (with no diminishing returns), negating most of the value of a 1-time break.

In competitive play, the trinket rarely gets used to exclusively break a slowing effect, it's almost always saved to break an immobilizing effect which is far more dangerous to a warrior (or a long-duration stun). By comparison, the effect of an undispelled long duration cc like polymorph tends to affect the outcome of a fight much more drastically than an undispelled snare.

So, while there are of course posts where some warriors feel they'd prefer the snare removal, there are also plenty of warriors I know of on top arena teams that feel the polymorph removal is the stronger overall option. I wouldn't say that PTR feedback is pointless, I'd say that people with an opinion contradictory to your own have gotten their way this time.

Q u o t e:


You do... but it seems most of the warriors don't.

I'd be curious to know how you measured "most"?

Q u o t e:
So you're only listening to the top arena team warriors? Figures...

Versus... listening to ineffective warriors when it comes to making a decision regarding the use of a pvp item during pvp?

Q u o t e:


Oh come on, you could take my sig alot of ways.

+

Q u o t e:
" Q u o t e:
Did Kalgan call the OP "ineffective?"



Yep, me and any other Warrior who cares to disagree with the change.

Hmm.

Q u o t e:


There it is again, a "me" attitude, quite frankly who cares what you think, your customers, people who pay you, believe otherwise, listen to them.

When I get conflicting feedback, it's my job to decide who I think is right.

Not only is it sketchy at best to assume that the trinket change is actually opposed by "the majority", but being "right" doesn't necessarily have anything to do with siding with the majority or minority. If this weren't the case, you could make a great game by polling people to make every decision. As far as I can tell, that hasn't ever been vaguely close a successful strategy.

Q u o t e:


Crippling poison?

Edit: If I trinket out of kidney, who cares. I'll still have crippling poison on, the rogue's just gonna kite me in intercept's deadzone.

I'd say rupture kiting rogues are one of the warrior's least concerns in group pvp.

However, I think there's some validity to argue that the trinket loses value in cases where you'd use it to get out of an immobilizing effect while also under the effect of a slowing effect, and the target is also close enough to get to quickly without needing to use intercept anyways.

That being said, in my experience that case is narrow enough that it's less meaningful than a full duration polymorph.

Q u o t e:


Well earlier in the thread you said that slowing effects are mostly not subject to diminishing returns, while Polymorph is, in a group environment how often is a Warrior effected by an actual full duration polymorph?

In a group environment I find Polymorph dispelled, and not lasting the full duration, after that first Poly diminishing returns start to kick in, how is Polymorph the more devastating CC over a non-diminishing slow effect?

If you wanna focus around a group environment, a Warrior really can't play the slowing game that well, alot of high ranking teams save bof for the target of an assist train so he/she can move freely, while disrupting the assist train with CC/Slow/Etc.

Just want you thoughts.

Once you're assuming paladins alive on both sides with bof/cleanse it's pretty hard to assume anything at all about slows, immobilizes, or polymorph. In that scenario, it probably doesn't matter at all which one the trinket dispels, the trinket is almost certainly going to play very little part in who does or doesn't get that first key kill.

I think the trinket becomes more relevant in the scenarios where bof/cleanse/dispel aren't reliable for either side, and in those scenarios it seems to me that the poly removal is more useful than the slow removal.

Q u o t e:
I find it odd that the developers are building this game around large scale raiding and pvp, when the VAST majority of the player base simply doesn't have the time, or want to put in the time, to be "effective". A big portion of this is due to being burnt out from the repetition, and EQ style of progression, ie, kara=>gruul=>mag=>ssc=>eye=>black temple?

Ironic that time = effectiveness = skill?

Logic!

So, if the warrior trinket removed slowing effects instead of polymorph effects it would mean we'd be building the game around the vast majority of the player base? I'm really not following how you're arriving at that conclusion from this particular discussion.

Q u o t e:

Obsfucation FTL, sir. You know very well this stems from your comment that implied only the players in top Arena teams are 'effective', and thus their feedback should weigh more in your mind than other players.

Yes, their feedback for this particular change holds more weight. Somehow, some of you have extrapolated that (erroneously) into the assumption that all decisions are made that way.