From Tseric on the priest boards

Because I was referring to general design philosophy, while I am guessing that you are looking at it from simply a group PvP angle. Pocket healers and the like, yes?

Am I far off in that estimation?

Q u o t e:


Took bringing priests into warrior forums to bring you here ! :)

Not really. I travel the boards on my own accord. ;)

Q u o t e:


I think they refrain from posting because they don't know what to tell us.

Hmmm...perhaps some. I have refrained for a while because I had already said what I wanted to a while back and I tend to dislike repeating myself. heh.

I think a lot of warriors know what the score is, some just dislike it or choose not to accept it.

Q u o t e:
Have you EVER tried to PvP solo with one, only to have a warlock throw a couple of dots on you and flee into the wilderness as you slowly die, stuck in combat, unable to charge or generate enough rage to intercept, crying because all of your gear is useless?

If you're going to talk about solo PvP balance, I am simply going to restate what any class developer is going to say. The game isn't designed for you to have any assurance of winning a solo fight. If you want to duel, that's fine. If you find yourself alone on a battleground, that happens, too. But there has never been a guarantee for any class of a win in a solo PvP situation.

If you want to call another class overpowered, go right ahead. I might even agree with you. What is not going to help your game is to think you should have counters for every 1v1 PvP situation built into your class, which is what I hear a lot of from many classes.

Example, warriors want crowd control or caster counters. Your a melee class and it is an intended weak side for the class to be suseptible to crowd control or snares. You do have some abilities that can break certain situations, but it is only for certain situations.

There will never be 'balance' for 1v1 just as there will never be 'balance' for world PvP. The factors are either minute in one case or too numerous in the other. We deal with the middle ground of dealing with group elements.

Q u o t e:

So your basically saying that other classes, lets say hunter and warlock, that CAN pvp 1v1, or in a group are just flat out better then warriors? That would clear things up.

I'll say here what I just said in another thread.

Talents at this time are designed with the idea in mind that the level cap is raised and that people are acquiring new gear.

However, the level cap has not yet been raised, nor are the majority of players seeing new gear.

This is simply going to skew balance in a way that we don't really like, but we have to accept for the time being.

Yes, the expansion will change matters, especially when a gear dependent class is going to be gaining new gear.

Yes, we absolutely want to measure the effects of rage normalization in the immediate future and continuing after release of the expansion. This would probably be the primary focus for this class with the class designers and the number-crunchers.

Will expansion alleviate all of your problems? I would never say something like that. What it is going to do is drastically affect class balance from what you are seeing now. Drastically.

I'd like to come in here and say, "Hey, look at the bunch of new shiny warrior abilities that will be hotfixed into the game tomorrow!" but that isn't happening.

The plain, simple fact is that warriors were strong and they got nerfed. They got nerfed probably more than any class in the past few months. They simply had the potential for too much damage. Now, if you don't see that from your particular perspective, that's fine. The point is, the excessive damage was possible and too many players were seeing it. Damage is brought down. Rage mechanics are reigned in.

When players begin settling into habits and play styles again with not only the new parts now, but what is soon coming, we reassess class balance again. So the cycle goes.

Q u o t e:



Warriors are not asking for a guarantee, their asking for a chance. There's a difference. You have completely lost sight of 1v1 pvp balance in "dealing with group elements"; maybe Blizzard simply chose to ignore that aspect of the game?

1v1 will never be balanced in this game. This is because the only way to balance 1v1 is to homogenize every class. To dilute them until they have the same ability with a different name.

That is the inevitable pressure applied to 1v1 class design.

Yeah, we are ignoring it, because it is a fruitless path.

Q u o t e:
In one post he says warriors will be gimp in 1v1 and we should accept it.

Another post he says we were too powerful and therefore we needed nerfs.

He can go to hell for all I care.

Tanque, have you ever heard of tense? As in past tense and future tense?

You're simply twisting my words for your own purpose.

Q u o t e:



Do you really think our damage was out of line compared to the damage other classes are currently putting out?
I got hit with a 5K starfire for !*#@s sake, get your head out of the sand and stop giving us the same old tired drivel.

Wow, you got crit once? :P

You and I both have no deep data and hard numbers on the matter. However, I can inquire with folks who do. And what they have told me is, from DPS testing early in beta (y'know, before tac mastery was moved to prot?) was that damage from fury warriors was exceeding the baseline (set by rogues as the highest dps class).

You can refuse to believe me all you like. In the end, just because you might not have been dealing that kind of damage doesn't mean that damage wasn't being dealt.

I am talking about then, you are talking about now. Yes, you got nerfed so of course your dps may be flagging. I have already given some other factors of why this might be true earlier in this thread.

Q u o t e:
I have both responded using your web form and direct e-mail (cmfeedback) on multiple occasions in an attempt to have the Talent Builds sticky post cap raised, or even have the thread removed; so far I have had no luck. Why do even basic forum management issues relating to warriors seam to take a back seat?

The moderators deal with requests of that type from every single forum here, save one. That amounts to somewhere around 200. Sticky requests can take some time because they aren't as pressing as moderation duties such as reported (offensive) posts.

You set a trap for yourself when you start to look at these matters in a personal light.

If you like, I can increase the post count now. The Talent build thread, yes?

Q u o t e:
One question that remains unanswered:

Does Blizzard acknowledge that the current talents, while maybe fine for level 70s, are terribly skewed?

we have to play our warriors at 60 for another month. Is it okay with you guys that we're gimps for this month just because when the expansion is out it will all work out?

Have you read the responses I've already provided? I did, in fact, pointedly address that.

Q u o t e:
GJ at ignoring all the important/hard questions!

And those would be...which exactly?

Do you want to contribute something worthwhile or do you want to simply act like you're better than me?

Your choice, each with it's own consequences.

Q u o t e:
Tseric, your prospective on these issues please:

1- The fact that rampage uses so much rage and almost impossible to be kept up with the normalization. In addition, it does not scale with gear which will cause future problems at 70.

I believe I may have mentioned this to the devs before, but I can certainly bring it up again.

Q u o t e:
2- Intercept ending up away from target in PVP.

I think these 2 issues are legitimate concerns. Thank you.

Number 2 deals with client to server communication. Intercept, like charge is basically a speedhack. When going that fast, the timing of calculations becomes more significant. This is kind of a tough nut to crack because doing everything we can on the server-side is still not what the solution demands. Differing ping rates, various networking between client and server, differing ISPs affect this issue.

Q u o t e:
1. Everyone knows about how he "pops" enrage.

Yeah, what...10 months ago? Keep carrying that torch, guy.

Q u o t e:
2. He once suggested spirit should diminish melee crits.

That was something I gathered feedback on for a number of classes because it was an idea being tossed around by the devs. The idea never panned out. Did it hurt your feelings?

Q u o t e:
3. He claimed the old polearm spec was better than axe spec because there are no 1-handed polearms.

No I didn't. Go find the quote. I said I like polearms for personal reasons. That's it.

Q u o t e:
4. He said the Intimidating Shout nerf was not a nerf but a bug fix.

Oh, if you want to call it a nerf, go ahead. Fact is, no AoE was ever intended to hit unlimited targets.

Q u o t e:
5. When people pointed out how absurd that statement was, he deleted the threads.

You sure that was the reason? Proof? I mean, you can simply make that statement without any substantiation, so no one can really prove you wrong, eh?

Q u o t e:
6. He hated reading our forums so much that he sent Coreiel to read it for him.

lol. That's a gem. What goes on in that conspiratorial head of yours?

Q u o t e:
7. He bemoaned how warriors didn't provide him with a comprehensive list of issues to take to the devs. When we did, he made dismissive comments about important issues and didn't bother to post a response from the devs until we started spamming the mage forum.

Don't really recall anything like this. Funny how you should phrase it in such a way to make you look good and demonize me, though. You're infallable, eh?

Q u o t e:
8. He said that the AP/ToEP/ZHC trinket combo was "fine."

At the time, I also said the devs were reviewing it and saw no need to change it at that moment. You know what? Things changed. Amazing how they do that in a game that is continually being developed. :P

Q u o t e:
9. He said TM would never be trainable just like they would never make Evocation or Imp Arcane Explosion trainable for mages.

What I said was that arguing about making it trainable was pointless. The feedback had been conveyed, so it was better to discuss other topics. The big one at the time was protection spec. And hey, look what happened...TM goes trainable and Prot gets a lot of buffing. Again, amazing how the game changes...

Q u o t e:
10. Even after they made those trainable for mages he defended how TM should still not be trainable.

Again, simply didn't want to keep beating the dead horse. The devs knew your thoughts on the matter. Why belabor it?

Q u o t e:
11. He told us the devs would not normalize rage generation.

Yeah, at one point it was my opinion that they wouldn't do this. I was wrong. I don't like it any more than you do. Life sucks sometimes.

Q u o t e:
12. Then he told us the changes are "hardly noticeable."

Was that me or the devs? Coulda been both. Hold it against me if it warms your pillow at night.

Tanque, I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to present my side on some issues.

Enjoy your day.

Q u o t e:
What I would like to know is why was it decided to apply this patch over a month before the level cap was raised knowing how detrimental it would be to some classes?

The decision to release the 'on-ramp' patch for the expansion was based around mostly programming concerns wrapped in technical issues along with production schedules.

I don't have all the details on the whys and whatfors, but I think I could liken it to passing a kidney stone. If you break it up the pain and problems of transmission are significantly reduced.

Sorry for the stark, medical analogy, but it works. ;)

Q u o t e:

Flamestrike
Blizzard
Frost Nova
Arcane Explosion
Cone of Cold(zero collision size means you can hit a significant number of people in a tight space if they're packed together)
Dragon's Breath(same as CoC)
Hellfire
Rain of Fire
Volley
All Dynamite.
All Grenades.

Not. One. Has. A. Target. Cap. If you're in range, it'll hit you.

Ok, perhaps I phrased that incorrectly. A crowd control AoE effect that fears unlimited targets was not intended.

For the rest, damage caps come into play at ten targets. This isn't to say they won't take damage, but it will be reduced.

There's a sticky of it somewhere...anyone have a link for the AoE coefficients?

Q u o t e:


In other words, they knew servers would probably start crashing, and they needed to figure out why before the expansion.

Well, you also have to consider the size of the patch, as well. This was the biggest patch we have ever released. It could have been bigger. That wouldn't have helped the end-user much.

Q u o t e:
A lot of us are still curious as to the developer justification for the burst damage other classes can put out (I know it's not you making the changes big guy) while nerfing only ours.

Go go go.

Hmmmm......generally speaking, burst damage provides a certain amount of viability in PvP. Some classes lacked a good PvP viablilty, so it was buffed. Or at least, that's how it strikes me.

Be careful about saying 'only ours'. If you're going to state that this is the only class that has been nerfed, that would really beg a water-tight case, not simply tossing it out on the table. I mean, Shaman complain about their PvP viability when they have burst potential more than sustainable.

As for "ZOMG MAGE CRIT ME FOR OVER 9000", that is crit-based more than it is burst-based. Yeah, POM-Pyro and then enjoy the cooldown. Spell damage is generally higher than melee damage because of casting time being longer. To look at it as a one-to-one comparison and saying the damage is better doesn't really take into account that the caster has to stand there for 3+ seconds while a melee class should be closing the gap. Please, don't mention snares or roots or CC as a counter to the closing of the gap. I know it's coming and it is simply part of the basic game design. If you can't find a counter to that, then yes, you'll probably die.

Q u o t e:



I'm still waiting for Tseric to answer real questions, and not just flame attacks by some idiots. But then again, that wouldn't make him or blizzard look better. He should work for the white house.

I've done more than respond to flames. Perhaps you just missed them.

And...if you want me to respond to real questions, why are you flaming? Doesn't that seem a bit contradictory?

Q u o t e:

I'm sure this has been thought of and deemed not possible, but I'll throw it out there anyway.

Has any thought been given to possibly removing snares for the duration the player is using intercept and then immediately reapplying them at the conclusion of the 'speedhack'? It seems to me that when I am not snared/slowed intercept works at a near 100% rate. If the snares were removed as we hit intercept and then reapplied later we might get around this intercept targeting issue.

The reason the devs don't like that is that any sort of snare removal with charge has the potential for use outside of the intended design.

For example, say you had enough rage for intercept and more. You become rooted. Using intercept in the way you mentioned, you're going to intercept anyways, then become rerooted. Designing immunity into abilities can easily become exploitable.

The other reason being, the devs don't really like making game design decisions based around trying to account for latency. The ability then becomes a better or worse ability for those that do not experience latency. It becomes a different ability as the latency situation changes. Not good.

Q u o t e:
If fury warrior damage was too high, why were all warrior specs nerfed, including 2 handed arms?


(I am going to keep posting this until it's answered.)

Because Arms damage was high as well? I mean, Arms/Fury was the cookie cutter build of the warrior class for quite some time. Perhaps I shouldn't have singled out fury warriors. My apologies.

Q u o t e:

So what you're saying is that I am paying $15 a month to test content and that I wont be viable in PvP til level 70 when I start to aquire epics?

btw thanks for banning my other account.
Truth hurts doesn't it?

If that is how you want to interpret my words, there is really nothing I can do or say to make you think otherwise. Is there?

btw, thanks for admitting you circumvented a forum suspension.

Good luck out there.

Q u o t e:
I hope Tseric is still reading this thread after all that pointless heckling. I personally could care less about the bad quotes or nit-picking of Tseric's comments, but what I do care about is the warrior class.

I am a beta tester, I have hit 70, I have aquired some of the best gear available from regular and heroic mode lvl 70 instances and I'm currently wielding a 104 dps 2h mace (thunder). Now the idea is that we are being balanced around a level 70 build/gear setup, and so I will comment on that, not our current state within WoW, because lets be honest, we can all suck it up for a month its not a big deal.

We are not balanced. Normalization is working (which is a good thing), but it is working to normalize our rage at a point too low for what we need to do in pvp and pve. There is nothing more frustrating than waiting for three swings of your 3.8 speed weapon to get enough rage to throw out a Mortal Strike, or being reluctant to use any tertiary rage dumps (slam, ww, hs) because you don't know if there will be enough rage left over to hit your next MS. Endless rage helps a bit, but it is a huge sacrifice in your talent build - you lose a ton of utility talents like imp. zerker rage, imp. slam, deathwish, and imp. intercept - all invaluable abilities for pvp and pve. That said, increasing our rage gain a bit and making some talents more desirable would greatly improve our classes' performance.

Giving us some +crit talents would help our damage output and spike damage in pvp (something we are very reliant on), and changing or swapping some of our new spells would greatly help to balance our class.

- Change improved mortal strike to add 5% crit to your mortal strikes instead of 5% extra damage, or reduce the casting time on Slam to .5seconds (the current imp. slam time) and make the improved slam talent add 2/4% crit.
- Make spell reflect a usable skill in pvp. This can be done in a number of ways: reduce the rage cost, make it usable in zerker stance, remove the shield requirement, or increase the duration.
- Barring a spell reflect "fix", it, or victory rush could be replaced with storm bolt - a range only, targetable stun (like in the other warcraft games) that stuns for 1-2 seconds. Depending on the cooldown this would not be overpowered but would help us immeasurably. This would also serve to give us warriors something exciting to level up to - something that victory rush and spell reflect certainly did not do for me (wtb cloak of shadows or steady shot).

In conclusion, while we are very much the same class at level 70 as far as playstyle and the skills that we use, the limit to our rage generation has severly decreased our utility and damage output especially in a pvp situation. There are a few bright spots in our talent trees - second wind, improved slam, improved bezerker stance, and focused rage - but generally speaking we have gained very little from talents and lost much from rage normalization. This is in comparison to most other classes who have gained much from the way their damage is calculated and new skills and talents. It is extremely dissapointing to play the one class that loses out the most by playing TBC.

I am still reading. Thank you for your comments.

upped the post count for more replies...