Yes, we know… it’s around the same place ret is at…
You just paint a very different picture between the two when they are in the same place.
Paladin doing 16.5k DPS:
Look how amazing everything is, the world bows to your greatness!
Warrior doing 16.5k DPS:
This is a serious grievance! Warrior will never recover from this insult of only being among the best.
Really? The DPS chart pretty much has warrior about the same as…
Priest, ret, rogue, hunter, shaman…
Most of the DPS specs better represented have multiple DPS specs that bring different raid buffs.
The only reason “warrior” has low representation is prot, which has literally nothing to do with fury’s performance, nor would warrior see a noticeable representation shift if you gave it an arbitrary 5% DPS.
Prot needs help, not fury.
2 Likes
What’s really funny is Abralan would rather scream and cry about Ret and Feral instead of UH DK and Aff lock
'So warriors are just screwed for all of WOTLK?"
Finally you get it.
At least this isn’t like original Wrath where the entire expac was dominated by plate classes all the way thru apart from the occasional shaman and spriest. Like a warrior popping bladestorm and your entire arena team that was standing on top of him died. Or like when rets were unstoppable gods or like when DKs could down people while they were wearing blue gear…thats why Blizzard over compensated and made Cataclysm have the casters be extra buffed and also gave their armour values a more akin to all the others and their HP pools as well changed. The occasional affi lock was good arena support or good in BGs. Other than than. Mostly plate dominated apart from the ele shams.
Yea Wrath Classic is nowhere near balanced, but it is 10x better than what we had last time around.
Those classes were naturally there. Ret and Feral got insane buffs that were meta changing, while other classes that also needed buffs was left to rot basically. Its classic. We know what were all getting into. Having it become someone’s private server with meta changing balance changes was the stupid part.
Starfall does infinitely more damage. Bladestorm crits cloth for like 2-3k in bis gear, basically what a dot tics for haha.
So, you have this bad habit of not being able to choose a narrative. Namely, being unable to decide between:
Warrior should be top!
and
Changes are bad!!
Warrior would NOT magically find its way to the top if feral and ret got nerfed. Nor would they have been at the top at any point in Wrath. If Feral and Ret hadn’t gotten what they did, feral would rely on mechanics that weren’t intended to not be horrible and Ret would be irrelevant… and so would warrior. Hell if #nochanges hadn’t gone out the window over a year and a half ago (when they announced Wrath), UH would be so far and away the best DPS that a typical raid would be a few classes to support them, and then as many DK’s as possible doing 30k+ DPS to destroy bosses so hilariously fast it was like having cheat codes.
But nah, go on. Keep stamping your feet and pretending this isn’t all about your warrior having to actually compete on equal terms with ret for STILL not the top spot in an optimal raid. Because even with the feral nerf all that did was put MAGE at the top.
1 Like
the meta would be preserved, and classes with things like battle rez and innervate wouldnt be so far ahead of classes that dont
this big problem is that this broken meta happened due to CHANGES
if a class got some nerfs, and then was still #1, cant be that mad over those changes but still unrelated enough to not care about in the context were looking at
Oooo and look at that, dodging again! 
Been fun, but I need to argue with someone useful again. Maybe a neighborhood cat or a random rock. They’re certainly better company than you.
1 Like
Talk about the lowest bar you could possibly fathom for complaining.
“PTR Representation”
How does everyone not already have this guy on ignore?
1 Like
So wheres the shadow priest buffs? wtf I want to be #1
Because Abralan is crying about the buffs and UH and Aff locks didn’t receive buffs.
While I don’t agree with him about the state of balance heading into p4 (I think it’s pretty balanced) I do agree with him that Devs picking favourites without using a fair and well understood benchmarking system for buffing classes is a bit rank.
It’s funny you mention Aff Locks too, because they’re a case in point. If the buffs and nerfs were intended to achieve balance and weren’t arbitrary then Aff Locks should and would have had a nerf.
1 Like
What meta would be “preserved” if raids didn’t sta… wait, raids still only bring 1 ret and 1 feral.
What meta changes would nuking those specs to the ground accomplish to bring 20 warriors again?
Warriors were never going to be top DPS in WOTLK it was just warrior cope.
2 Likes
The blue post explanation given was lengthy and easy to understand.
1 Like
I mean, the meta is new anyway even without changes.
Why is the emergent meta where ret is useless better than the changed meta where ret is about where we used to be in relative performance?
You are getting mad about changes to a meta that’s wholly unique to wrath classic. It’s silly.
Blizzard should have done more changes to class balancing (tanks/healers especially).
Fury has been fine since Ulduar though
1 Like
It shows you raid comp on kills. As expected, warrior is viewed as bad because news flash the class is bad.
Warrior isn’t viewed as bad. Only you view warrior as bad.
Only prot is “bad”, and that’s mostly because you only get 2 slots and prot pal is better.
I’m not really talking about how they justify case by case. I said many times I think the Ret buff specifically was well justified.
What I am talking about is the lack of a general basis for assessing class balance - such as damage thresholds and such. Blizzard have been very vague on that - leaving themselves open to bias claims.
Back when Ret got buffed I thought Fury had a good case for a small buff too and the reasoning Blizzard gave for not doing so seemed muddled. Extend that beyond the Warrior vs Ret discussion, it makes no sense that when Blizzard are actively looking at balance for one or two classes that Affliction can lead the charge in every phase without being looked at at all.
This tells me that the balance changes are being done adhoc and without much assessment being done of overall class balance.
If this is the case then you are always going to have a situation where Blizzard are perceived to be picking winners and losers arbitrarily.
Now, back to Abralan, it’s clear he singles out Ret and Feral and not UH and Affliction, because he is salty about them getting buffed and his class not. That’s still sour grapes and a bit naff to be carrying that into p4 - however it’s understandable why he doesn’t focus on Affliction or UH - they didn’t get buffed and his issue is with what he perceives to be Blizzard changing the meta arbitrarily.
While I don’t think Blizzard did change the meta (at least not with Ret) I do think Blizzard left themselves open to charges of bias with the adhoc way they handled class balance. I don’t think it’s a hill worth dying on though, given how tightly balanced p4 is looking like being. It’s precisely what I worried about a year back when I was skeptical about Blizzard fiddling with WoTLK balance. That they wouldn’t invest the resources to do it in a robust comprehensive way.
1 Like
“If you aint first, you are last” - Ricky Abralan Bobby