[Warrior] Where SHOULD we be on DPS?

#1 - March 2, 2009, 11:54 p.m.

/signed

And to answer your question Ad....

Pures feel it is their RIGHT to top dps meters. If its not that individual or that individual's class, then something is wrong and must be changed. There's nothing wrong with the player. Its some other classes fault because they're OP'ed.

WE bring DPS...nothing else. If we bring a MUCH lower level of dps, then why bring us at all?

So...a guild will only bring an arms warrior and a fury warrior for their MEAGER few buffs and that's it outside of tanks? And what? Only to fill with pures and a couple other hybrids?

That's the solution most "PURES" really want.

Ghostcrawler

#73 - March 4, 2009, 7:04 p.m.

Q u o t e:
Where do the developers feel warriors should rank in terms of DPS with the other classes/specs available given our lack of raid utility?

Is this really a question you don't know the answer to? I don't get to drag out the reallies like the players do very much, so I'll that the advantage of that here. Really?

Rogues, mages, warlocks and hunters should be doing the highest dps, if you assume all other things are equal. Other things are never equal. Gear, skill, group buffs and encounter (in PvE) all matter a lot. In PvP, highest damage matters a lot less than specific abilities that let you control or break control.

There will be fights where warriors are on top because the situations favor them. There will be fights where the shamans or priests are on top.

Arms and Fury warriors should be mixed in with Elemental and Enhancement shamans, Shadow priests, Retribution paladins, Feral and Balance druids, and 3 types of DKs. Currently on live we feel that Arms isn't up to this level and Fury is too high. If you think Fury is not too high then you are probably comparing your dps on live to classes that also received dps nerfs in 3.1.

Ghostcrawler

#170 - March 4, 2009, 7:59 p.m.

Q u o t e:
What exactly is the point of bringing a warrior to dps then? All our raid buffs are overwritten by better versions of the same buff other classes have.

It is not our goal that you (or any class) have crappy versions of other buffs so you feel like second-class citizens. To be fair though, a lot of players make this claim about their raid buffs. Some of these complaints are totally legit and some are just thinly veiled requests for damage / healing / tanking buffs. We are trying to adjust areas where your buff feels inferior to another buff, either because it is too expensive, doesn't last as long, has an opportunity cost or whatever.

What we are not interested in doing:

-- Buffing a spec because their buffs are inferior. (We would rather fix the buffs.)
-- Giving any spec unique buffs to make sure they will earn a spot.
-- Buffing a spec because another spec with those buffs is "always" in the group. (The intent is that "always" depends on the guys you run with.)
-- Coming up with an over-specific or unrealistic model where warriors are 1% above druids and 3% above shamans or whatever. Such a design would shatter the first time someone upgraded their gear.
-- Start defining things in terms of half-hybrids or two-third hybrids or whatever. Related to the previous point, having fewer larger buckets works better for a number of reasons.

Apologies if I sounded snippy. I am just surprised that anyone who follows these forums would not know our goal for the stack rank of dps classes. The topic is perennially on the first page here.

What I didn't mention is that in BC the goal was to keep hybrid classes far inferior to the dps of the rogues, warlocks, mages and hunters. We want it to be much closer now. If you know your class cold, I mean really know it, then there is no reason you can't be topping meters. But some (key word) of that responsibility lies with you and not with us juicing the numbers in your favor.