My point is that it doesn’t do any good to complain endlessly about the Ret buffs–especially in the context of Prot War vs Prot Pal–because the actual issue people want addressed is for weak(er) specs to be made more comfortable. It would be nice for Arms to not be a meme, for Druids not named “Resto” to be worth anything, or for a host of other builds/specs to have a raid spot.
However, the problem with Pally over-representation is a lot more to do with player perception than actual class power. Many people think Warriors aren’t viable when they completely are.
1 Like
“My point is that it doesn’t do any good to complain endlessly about the Ret buffs–”
Disagreed entirely. How do you think they got the buffs in the first place.
Disagreed entirely on the ‘player perception’ issue as well. Prot paladins are demonstrably overtuned.
Sure, these are facts but what you said before was BS. Being good In a different game doesn’t justify being unviable in this one. The fact that they are viable is a different point.
But whatever make a stupid point and stand by it - whatever floats your boat.
Warriors are viable and don’t need a buff. But then dominating in a different release is not a justification for them being unviable - if they were.
1 Like
You have a chicken & egg problem here and I’m not sure if I have failed to articulate it properly or if you’re deliberately trying not to acknowledge it.
- Players created a perception that Pally was the “only” tank for Ulduar HMs–especially before it even released.
- Based on this belief, people overwhelmingly selected Paladins to raid Ulduar with.
- These biased selection created the over-representation and skewed data you are talking about.
You yourself perpetuation this perception issue, so it’s hard to take seriously your calls to action on how to remedy the problem because people aren’t talking about the facts–they are talking about their perceptions.
2 Likes
I would argue warriors, dks and bears are unviable as main tanks as far as practicality is concerned.
Why pick a B tank when there are 30% more S-tier prot paladins available to begin with
Edit: To Blakfeather, this is demonstrably untrue. You can look at the toolkit of a prot paladin for 30 seconds and see that’s completely false. They have a shield wall on a -3minute cooldown compared to warriors.
They have 3 forms of mitigation, dsac, constant block uptime with holy shield, buffs, ardent defender. Not to mention two taunts.
Doesn’t that just show they scale more quickly?
Facts? Where is the source you are citing? You’re just in your feelings because your class isn’t currently in the meta, it is viable. You tell yourself whatever you need to tell yourself though.
1 Like
The irony is that Warriors would probably be included in the meta more strongly if people weren’t pushing this narrative that they aren’t viable.
1 Like
See my last reply blakfeather.
You’re 100% wrong.
Just saying “no u” doesn’t rebut anything.
That’s why you should address my last reply.
It’s just not in the meta currently and people like to make a big stink out of it. Can’t excel at everything all the time.
Apparently you can, if you’re a paladin and whinge enough.
I did. I discussed why the “data” you’re referring to is skewed and doesn’t make the point you want it to.
That was before my reply. See my edit 4 replies back. Specifically referring to abilities that paladins have over other tanks.
My only max level is an enhance shaman. Warrior is usually in a better state than both shaman and paladin.
Well that’s just completely untrue.
Vanilla and TBC… who was BY FAR AND AWAY the best DPS, warrior.
I didn’t play either of those as warrior. Should I settle for hypocrisy now because there was hypocrisy in the past?
I may also add: None of that was a result of changing the game through class balancing.
So after reading the edit, I don’t see how it changes anything. You’re just repeating the rhetoric that people used to create the perception issue in the first place. You’re steel-manning Paladin while straw-manning Warrior, just like the influencers did.