From what i’m seeing and reading fury warrior will be inferior to arms in pvp again. I recently read through the Skyhold shadowlands fury page and people were argueing over weather or not fury needed to be good in pvp, or what buffs exactly could make fury a viable pvp spec for warriors. The idea i saw the most was giving them ramping damage and pressure so they HAD to be dealt with or a death would occur. That being said i thought i should post a forums page to see peoples ideas that could make fury a viable pvp spec. (Do not post any BS about how it doesnt need to be good in pvp, thats not what this post is for, its for ideas that COULD make is viable in pvp)
Big sticks need to hurt more.
5 Likes
I imagine in Arenas, Fury will be the secondary spec to Arms as it has almost always been. In BGs, Duels and World PvP i see Fury doing better than it has before with the utility we are getting.
Who the heck knows how Covenants and Legendaries will affect the game also?
Its probably all too early to say at this point.
4 Likes
your post was already talked about in this thread, if you dont want fury to be good in pvp, dont post here, duels and open world pvp dont matter they will always be unbalanced in some way.
as to “lickles” why are you even posting here? your comment is pointless and stupid, “big sticks need to hurt more” whats your point? whats wrong with wanting your class/spec to actually be playable in pvp?
He did not say that…?
Fury is already playable in PvP.
The spec is already viable. Viable is a largely useless term.
You’re totally that Brazil guy, that trolled in Skyhold for a few hours and finally got ran out because people got sick of him.
Do you ever change up your material?
2 Likes
How many times can you say the same thing over and over again in one post
Don’t understand why this is a talking point. Arms has always been better than fury for PvP. Is this any surprise? What do you want, for fury to be better than arms?
Having had 0 tuning passes for PvP so far, it’s way too early to say what needs to happen, what will happen, and whether or not fury will be good or bad in PvP.
On top of that, fury is already viable. Like Derez said, viable is a largely useless term. Everything is viable.
Once more, nobody knows what fury needs because nobody knows how well or how poor it’s going to perform until probably a month after launch. There’s also already a thread about what fury needs, but that’s based on now. Also, again, viable doesn’t mean anything.
1 Like
Well, not always. Just commonly.
2 Likes
Fury seems to be better without a healer. Arms seems to be better with a healer.
1 Like
Too be fair though I think they should give storm bolt baseline for all warrior specs so we literally don’t have to spec in and move some talents around.
Like for Fury example we have bounding strides right next to two defensive talents compared to impending victory right above with double charge, and stormbolt atm which is weird never used. (Tbh could just move impending victory with Victory charge and warpaint with all three competing with each other)
3 Likes
I’ll address most of the comments:
Yes, technechly fury is already “playable” or “viable” in pvp, however in arenas it falls far short of actually being in ANY good comp.
I’ve only ever posted on skyhold 2 or 3 times so nah, i’m not the troll your looking for, i saw 15 other people talking about ideas to make fury decent in pvp so i posted this forums to see more ideas.
I don’t want arms to be worse than fury or vice versa, my point is i want them both to be GOOD options for doing arenas or RBGs not just open world and duels.
Edit: if you don’t have any ideas for how to improve fury in pvp, don’t comment here. (for the 3rd time)
2 Likes
fury/surv/rshaman and fury/ww/rshaman are both glad level comps this season. So let’s stop the notion that it isn’t good in PvP.
No one will know what is viable in PvP for s1 of SL, but you can go ahead and put money on arms still being the primary rated PvP spec.
2 Likes
Better burst and utility is needed. Execute needs to do more damage with the cd
1 Like
It would be nice for balance reasons however it has always been (Arms PvP) and (Fury PvE). My issue with Fury is its too simple and lacks a lot of utility and pressure damage. Arms has all the utilities and Bleeds where as Fury just has plain damage with self heals. If they plan on buffing Fury to be like Arms than they will need to take something away to balance it, maybe reduce or remove some of Fury’s self healing abilities. Having both will be extremely overpowered.
Arms is better in Groups, Fury is better Solo. All classes are better with healers to be perfectly honest.
1 Like
Sorry my friend, but you don’t get to post here asking what people think about fury with regards to pvp, then tell them they’re stupid for voicing their opinion.
I agree that it would be nice if fury had a niche in pvp beyond just dealing damage, but to say fury is unplayable in pvp is wrong. They are very playable, not as attractive a choice as arms maybe, but certainly playable.
Fury is amazing in open world pvp, duels and such. I know it’s not rated like arena is, but it is just as legitimate of a pvp experience. Fury can do well in arena, you just need the right comp. so stop complaining bout fury and play the spec you like, but right now, it kind of sounds like you don’t like fury much.
3 Likes
Fury is only weaker in arenas. It’s perfectly strong, infact I prefer it for BGs when I don’t have a dedicated healer. The biggest fury issue is that crits are neutered in PVP, and fury relies on crit/burst damage. The current SL iteration has crits at a higher % in PVP, so we kind of have to wait and see; the SB legendary+AM giving us reck much more frequently may even push fury to very strong with gear.
If fury got MS, arms would likely be useless. There has to be a difference between the specs, and it’s ok for arms to be stronger for 3v3s. Different playstyles are fun, they keep the game fresh, fury is hardly useless and, as someone already stated, it has some glad viable comps this season.
3 Likes
Even if they had ms, the amount of utility arms has now would not make fury better than them.
1 Like
What utility in shadowlands does arms have on fury?
Piercing 80% slow, Hamstring baseline, SR baseline, deep wounds is no longer a super bleed, stormbolt is a talent for both etc.
Besides MS, in Shadowlands, what do you view arms as having on it?
Duel, War Banner, and Sharpen Blade. Fury cannot compete with Arms right now as is. Fury’s best asset in Arenas was the ability to maintain a much higher up time on a target thanks to Thirst for Battle to make up for it having subjectively lower burst and no Mortal Strike. Since, they no longer have that talent, they fall short in comparison unless the damage they bring outweighs their short comings.
3 Likes
Sharpen would mean considerably less IF Fury had an MS as well, duel is hardly ever used as typically banner/rally/SR or disarm bring more uses overall, so banner is the 1 thing. Which is also only useful into SOME comps.
I never said arms was garbage if fury had MS, I said the spec would be far less useful/swapped to, and fury is looking to have better burst if the crit multiplier stays higher.
Arms being the better PVP spec is good, it having an identity is good, MS to fury would mostly invalidate arms. The entire point of unpruning was to remove homogenization.
Duel was actually used a lot back when Arms was not considered to be the kill target, it wasn’t uncommon to see it being used in Legion and in early BFA. With that being said, whether an ability is used more often than not does not remove the fact that it gives players more potential options.
I don’t think anyone was claiming that you thought Arms would be garbage if Fury had MS/Sharpen Blade. Instead, players were only stating why Fury can be viewed as inferior in its current state. As I had previously stated, the only way Fury could compete with Arms would be for them to have a higher burst/damage potential to make up for the lack of MS/Sharpen Blade + other utility options.
There’s nothing wrong with Arms being the “better” PvP spec, but that pertains to just how much “better” it is. If it’s marginally better, then that’s fine. If Fury only has a few comps that they excel in, no problem. The issue that player’s are having is at this very moment, Fury does not look like it will be able to compete at higher ratings. It’s only niche that it had over Arms was taken from them (Thirst for Battle), and in fact there are players that view it as being too similar to Arms but with less to offer.
Just to clarify, I’m not advocating for it to have Mortal Strike, I like the idea of specs being different from one another, whilst bringing their own unique strengths to the team. Also, if you’re satisfied with Fury only being superior to Arms outside of any high-rated competitive situation, that’s fine, but I’d argue that many players are not.
2 Likes