It’s really, really not lol.
2 Likes
Yeah nah.
/10 char
So you can commiserate with rets in this instance then?
Cuz that’s why ret got what it did. Low spec representation.
Warriors are fine.
arms is basically dead last and fury is towards the bottom still, even in ICC, compared to the same ilvl and if you bring a Legendary into the mix (that traditionally isnt considered for balance because its rare - see hunters in TBC or Atiesh in Vanilla) theyre beat by a high-utility ret because of arbitrary buffs that, as Zirene puts it, “is an exception.” lol
I mean, it basically put rets at the same point as warriors…
Mid tier without legendary, upper tier with.
It’s not running on any different rules as warrior, you just take offense to them being higher than fury on sims which may not even translate to real performance (sims are only as good as the programming, and they often forget important things, like how they were overvaluing caster crit values by 2.1% until very recently).
Nerfing ret back to mid tier with a legendary would just leave it where it was before the buffs: the undisputed worst DPS spec with no alternative to do viable DPS.
No utility is worth that due to overlaps, no matter how high you view their offerings.
The only reason rets were “an exception” was because we were literally the only class without a viable DPS option until blizz stepped in.
Even if you think they over buffed ret, it was only by like 1, maybe 2%, which is hardly worth this level of anger, given that it changes nothing about how ret or warrior is utilized.
Fight
and stuff
Buff arms.
You have a strange definition of “near the bottom” that conflicts with just about every list out there showing Fury in a good spot and rising. I understand sticking to a narrative though, points for consistency.
Sorry that you are dissatisfied with one of your two DPS specs. Just let my ret swap to his other…oh wait.
Who is losing dps to get that utility (Dsac) and has no reason to be brought for that utility as it is either brought by a holy or a prot, things like replenishment are available from other sources, that would replace a ret almost instantly, if your demand to reverse the changes happens.
But smarter paladins than me have already explained this to you. repeatedly and in better form than I.
Zirene himself on twitter said that ret is an “exception” to the rule they dont want to balance classes. This is very likely because Aggrend, the senior game producer, plays Ret.
Ret scales harder in ICC than warrior. Warrior never got buffs. In Naxx, Ret was above fury and the last 2 phases theyve been pretty tied, with ret pulling ahead on fights like Valks or single target fights (lol already) and warrior only winning where 3+ cleave opportunities arise like Jaraxxus. In ICC there is a lot of single target fights.
With the current 11% buff to ret, ret will be beating fury in a lot of prog. Then ret scales harder and outright pulls ahead of fury. Considering this is a balance change and not a QoL change for ret, it is totally unjustified in the greater scope of the game and their effort to not change class balance.
Ret in ICC is really good, even without the buff. Easily the best place to get the 3% dmg buff as well. Paladin has S++ tier Holy and Prot specs as well, making it the most popular class in the game overall for raiding. Warrior’s combined specs has been at the bottom or close to bottom all game so far because all of its specs are weak and it doesnt bring anything beyond commanding shout that an imp technically can cover that a far better class doesnt already bring.
Early in wrath the devs joked about not wanting to change ilvl so “fire mages and fury warriors can be broken end game” but this was based on misinformation. Only fire is broken end game. Fire is already top tier, and gets even stronger in ICC. Meanwhile fury is middle of the pack overall, middle/top on cleave and bottom on single target. The -10% from TG was too much unfortunately, and they scale mostly parallel so there is no “252 kings” for warriors.
1 Like
He literally explained why… ret was the only class that didn’t have a viable DPS option, this it was the exception with buffs.
It doesn’t, but sure, keep on believing that.
Started in the same place in ulduar, ending in the same place in ICC = scaling harder in your eyes.
They will be about the same. Who has a slight edge on any given week is very irrelevant. Each fight is different and warrior remains better at cleave.
This probably won’t happen in any real sense. You are basing this on sims that are far from perfect predictions. Even if the sims are perfectly accurate and ret is slightly ahead, what changes if you nerf them by 1% to be below fury?
Absolutely nothing.
This is just laughably false. Without the buff, BM hunter is a better source of the 3% buff. Arcane mage is the best source of it. Arcane mages want rets to stay good so they can be fire.
Irrelevant to ret.
It’s not misinformation… fury sims pull ahead of ret once ruby sanctum opens up mid phase and is basically tied with for 2nd place with marks hunters.
Projected 3rd place and only 3% under projected sims for the highest DPS spec (fire) on single target is middle of the pack?
None of the numbers for fury even slightly agree with your positions, so you have to pull up data from two phases ago when warriors were weaker to support your position that warrior is anything but a top DPS in ICC.
At this point it feels like I’m arguing with chatGPT and it hasn’t learned how to say anything but rehashed warrior forum complaints on repeat.
3 Likes
This might have weight if the initial “we aren’t buffing ret” post wasn’t actually posted by Aggrend…Enjoy your made up narrative though.
1 Like
Warrior didnt either, Ret was ahead of warrior in Naxx lol
Warriors has 2 specs, 1 bad and 1 ultra bad
It does, TAJ, t10, and SMourne all give more dps to ret than any similar comparison to warrior. TAJ >>> DBW. t10 is better, and smourne gives like 300 more dps to ret.
Ret always was going to be great in iCC, it will be OP now
You should stop making up easily checked things.
https://www.wowhead.com/wotlk/news/wrath-classic-dps-rankings-phase-1-week-7-naxxramas-eye-of-eternity-obsidian-330085
Oh look, warriors ahead of ret!
Yeah, that’s why we end up in the same place… right? (According to sims)
All that overpowered scaling!
Your “great” definition for rets with a shadowmourne is under fury without a shadowmourne…
1 Like
I went to logs, looked at phase 1 one patchwerk, and saw ret ahead of both warrior specs by a good amount. Are you going to look at low parses on overall with a bunch of cleave? haha
ret is better than fury and way better than arms, and both protpal and holy paly are insane over prot warrior lol
Even on patchwerk top fury parses were higher than Ret’s by the end of the phase.
For the rest it was basically tied with arms with a slight single target advantage on the undead standstill boss while warrior cleave was better, which gave it a slight edge overall.
It’s hardly a glowing example of “rets were better.”
And rets weren’t keeping warrior representation down back then either. No reason to be mad at them in ICC for also being basically tied.
I just looked at it yesterday, this is false
ICC is all undead, T4 bonus, TAJ, and Smourne, + a 10% buff “exception” from blizzard makes Ret the #2 melee in ICC 
Uhh… might want to look again.
Retail ret may not be good but I’m having a blast with it casually.
1 Like
https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zone/statistics/1015/#region=1&boss=101118
Im looking right at it, ret is ahead
That’s from a range over 2 weeks and it’s not the final weeks of the phase because the top parses I linked were from the final week of P1. January 14th for the top Fury and January 12th for the top Ret.
Fury =| 8,310.3 Jan 14
Ret = | 7,401.0 Jan 12
Roll back all changes.
Otherwise, prepare to buff all other classes.