Retribution: What are we supposed to be?

#0 - Aug. 29, 2010, 6:56 p.m.

In spite of the multiple changes to both the playstyle and abilities of the Retribution spec, our actual intended role is still a complete mystery. Not only that, but the current direction of design has me greatly concerned about our future.

The current design direction seems to be about Ret revolving around high burst while supporting teammates via dedicated heals, but with far less defense, no combat healing, and a very minute increase in offensive utility. If this is our design intent, then I am very afraid, because it would appear Blizzard has not learned from past mistakes.

Relying on burst to remain viable is a recipe for disaster, as 3.0 made abundantly clear. Chances are the current level of burst will not make it to the actual expansion before being severely neutered in response to complaints from lower levels. Secondly, providing powerful heals for teammates will not be a good enough excuse to bring a Ret on the team because they will not replaced dedicated healing specs, and most importantly, this will be following the same design philosophy that caused Ret to traditionally fail for years. There is nothing wrong with a DPS tossing a quick heal out to help a teammate now and again, but implementing dedicated healing talents in a DPS tree to encourage a more dedicated role in this department is ridiculous.

My question GC is where are we supposed to be strong? We have lost massive amounts of defense and all our combat healing, but we have gotten very little and very limited offensive utility to make up for it, leaving us still far behind other melee DPS in terms of group support, efficiency, and power.

Another question is why are we being held to such harsh standards when other equivalent melee DPS such as Warriors and DKs have suffered no real defense losses, have gotten increased offensive utility and mobility on top of what they already have, and who's combat healing has generally improved in both power and efficiency without the rather excessive drawbacks we have been left with which you called acceptable? It is our impression that we are being taxed far more than others for very minute gains, and we are wondering how this is worth what we have lost when we are still no stronger than others in any department besides burst.

My biggest fear is that the small gains we have seen will still leave us an expansion behind the others. If you added Imp Judgements and LAotL to the current WotLK Ret build, I'd say the spec would be damn near perfect. But with the loss of Cleanse, dispel protection, the vast majority of our defenses, all our combat healing, and Sacred Shield in Cata, these two small offensive gains don't come close to compensating for what we have lost. Essentially, when everyone else is taking a step forward, we have taken two back.

I hope this made sense, thank you for reading.

Sincerely,

A Concerned Ret

#15 - Aug. 30, 2010, 12:52 a.m.

You guys worry way too much about what buckets you're supposed to be in. It seems every time I come to the forums, I am asked to define someone's role. :)

In PvE, the only roles are tank, dps and healing. In PvP, the only roles are dps and healing (except for very specific circumstances like tanking Drek in AV). Situationally you might be called upon to carry a flag or defend a tower, but that's what you're doing at the moment, not what your talent spec is all about. There are 30 talent trees. They're all a little different. PvP doesn't have positions like quarterback, grenadier, left fielder, drum major or striker. Use all of the abilities you have in order to support your allies and be successful. If you're a Ret paladin, you should focus on melee dps, because that's where your strongest abilities lie.

Sometimes when I do try and explain how we think a spec should work, I often regret it. I'll say something like how Ret is supposed to be a melee dps class, and keep getting asked "Then why do we have heals?" or "Why should someone take me over a rogue if I'm just melee?" Trying too hard to label things is always going to result in a simplistic answer.

I'm not trying to dismiss the question. It's just not the way we think about things.