Its literally only you and 1 other dude.
2 Likes
Yeah itâs âliterallyâ not though.
Sorry, and your alts to make it look like more people are doing it.
Donât worry, Blizzard can see if youâre using alts.
2 Likes
Reported, come back with some evidence if you seriously think Iâm running alts to make these threads.
Seems convenient given you donât want warrior buffs to just chalk up everyone posting about it as âBladetsarâs altsâ.
Iâm not running multiple 80 warriors on multiple region servers.
There really wasnât a large portion of ret paladins. Most paladins are holy/prot. Most players didnât roll paladin to do DPS because the meta sheep all pick the class that carries them to the top of the meters.
So nah, it definitely wasnât a population thing. The buffs did nothing for the vast majority of paladins, nevermind the player base.
Nice try though.
Eh, the other tanks also look perfectly useable. The gap between tank viability is far smaller than the numbers suggest.
1 Like
Reported me for what? lmao
For calling out your spam? I donât need to prove anything. My job is not to prove it. My job is to bring to Blizzardâs attention for them to investigate.
I think youâve made enough threads.
3 Likes
Again youâre trying to deflect by acting as though rets and prot/holy paladins are separate entities. It costs you 50g to change into two very OP specs. I donât care that you want to play a divine crusader in WoTLK. Thatâs not what was intended in classic.
You are an OP class, you were OP before the buffs and the decision to buff you was not a balance decision, it was a business decision.
Well numbers seem to refute your opinion. Given prot paladins in proportion are so much ridiculously higher than the three other tank options.
Tesalyn: All those threads have different topics, the theme may be warriors sucking but they all have different premises. You may not like the frequency, but in no way am I saying exactly the same thing in any of those.
However, you slandering me without proof of alt running to create threads is reportable. You also didnât prove it in the least, most obviously because you canât.
Maybe youâre right, ret gets like 600dps vs a warrior over 1kdps from smourne? Something I read a few weeks back, cannot find source right now.
I mean, each guild will do it they way they want. But if they were going off just pure weapon damage scaling youâd want the first one going to war.
Yeah the difference is 300 dps.
Warrior gains 1300 dps and ret gains 1000.
This may change once tiny abom in a jar mechanics are confirmed to work for retâs seal attacks or not.
Warriors are currently simming 1250 dps over ret in phase 4 gear,
1 Like
Because they are. Just like prot warriors are different than fury ones, and feral druids are different than resto druids.
They donât play similarly, they require fully different sets of gear, and the purpose of the specs donât even overlap.
Thatâs cool, the developers of wrath did intend it though, so thatâs really all that matters.
Iâm glad you arenât designing the game.
Yes, paladins are arguably OP at tanking and healing. Thatâs not what ret does though, and ret canât do those things well, so it doesnât matter than it could respec and regear to play a role the player isnât interested in playing.
Your argument here is basically âyou should reroll instead of us making the balance betterâ
They are, yet thereâs nothing preventing the other tanks from being used, nor are the other tanks a noticeable handicap. They each have fights that they do best on. Iâd be fine with a prot pally nerf though. Iâve said so repeatedly. It really just needs to lose the cheat death to drop to basically on par with the other tanks.
A huge portion of that number is just the perception that pally tanks are OP, which led to mass rolling of protection pally, just like we saw overwhelming numbers of bear druids in TBC, despite their advantages also not mattering.
1 Like
my talent spec deserves more representation/abilities/dps than your entire class
repeat ad nauseam
1 Like
Good news! Ret doesnât have 2 of those 3 things.
It doesnât beat Furyâs DPS.
It doesnât even beat Furyâs representation, nevermind the full class.
I guess it has more abilities, but thatâs not really a useful measurement.
ret
#3 represented pally spec
needs to beat warrior #1 spec
okay bro
It doesnât need to, nor does it now, nor at any point in the future.
Fury is comfortably ahead of Ret of you play and gear properly in basically every metric.
1 Like
351,333 fury parses
vs 334,622 ret parses
oh sorry, how rude of me, 16,711 more fury than ret, what a huge differenceâŚ
âŚ
oh WAIT
457,103 warrior parses
1,271,707 paladin parses
huhâŚ814,604 moreâŚ
you shut up, and be patient and wait for your Shadowmourme and Deathbringer Will to arrive, so leave us alone Arpen fan, you chose that class, and youâll hang in there when ICC opens.
by the way do ToC 5N, there is a nice arpen trinket for your class, if you want to improve your Top DPS.
(see in WotLK WoWhead)
you shut up
how aboutâŚno? :^)
wait, wait, anyway in ICC the warriors proudly go top 1 with their huge DPS rightâŚ
You were the one who made the easily verifiable false claim that ret was doing better than your entire class.
It doesnât even beat the one spec you are complaining about.
And yes, itâs not news that raids use holy and prot paladins a lot. That didnât make ret OK. âJust change your roleâ is basically the same argument as âjust reroll.â Itâs admitting a problem, but refusing to fix it for an unrelated reason.
is that what I said? letâs seeâŚ
hmmâŚnoâŚlooks like I was mocking how you and many others argue in bad faith.
Straw-manning me is hardly your first argumentative fallacy. Good try? (not really)
Ret was in a bad spot, but that doesnât mean paladinâs #3 spec deserves as much or better representation as warriorâs #1. And yet thereâs only, what, 5% fewer rets than fury? And youâre somehow still upset?
The number of warriors is nearly as low as a third of the number of paladins.
Now thatâs a problem.