I have plenty of times. It also doesn’t matter if I mention paladins since that’s the metric by which balancing has been implemented.
Answer this: Why shouldn’t I bring up paladins in the balance debate? Am I allowed to bring up druids? Mages? DKs?
Why is it only paladins I can’t mention?
I dunno, have you tried it?
Well as long as you admit you’re without a clue. Now everyone else can see what I already inferred.
I have no problem letting this conversation stand as a testament of the sides at work here.
You couldn’t even repeat your supposed arguments for buffing warriors that don’t mention paladins, you just went “do your own research”.
It’s not that I couldn’t, it’s that I wouldn’t.
If you haven’t been present for the several dozen threads where this has been discussed, I can’t help you any further. Feel free to use that mousewheel and go find the arguments. I’m surprised you even chimed in which such little perspective on the matter.
This has been discussed for about 2 months now. From warrior tanking, to warrior dps (in fury and arms), how to implement buffs from glyphs to munching to changes in talents. To how to nerf other OP classes to implement better balance.
Are you really telling me you came here with no aforementioned knowledge?
Potato potato.
Well no, let me get you the definitions.
Would: Past of will
Could: used to indicate possibility
I think there’s only one potato here.
Meanwhile, everyone reading our exchange is just sat here going “yeah, I’m not reading through this guys history to see if he actually had a case for warriors without mentioning paladins”, but you do you.
Meanwhile, everyone realising you haven’t bothered actually reading any threads before you decided to start making posts about balance.
Like, how would I know before you told me that you don’t read threads on balance? Is it maybe because you use the tired and already refuted points that so many other forum casuals come with? Maybe I’m irate because it’s obvious you have no idea what you’re talking about here.
Did I tell you? Cause I’m not sure I did.
Is this just you putting words into people’s proverbial mouths again?
You didn’t, so how did I know? I’ll answer it: You used all the same tired talking points that people who think warriors don’t deserve a buff use.
They’re the main ones but I’m sure there are others.
Not true at all, small incremental buffs to bring the bottom closer to the top would do wonders.
The only thing that matters is how much dmg is dealt, small incremental buffs while closely looking at dmg into next phase would suffice.
Hello?? Logic?? Look at logs please.
Dude, you bring one. That’s it, the only situation you would ever bring more than one, is when your two of your buddies just refuse to play something else and you would rather play with the homie more than have an optimal raid comp.
Yeah, when warriors are played at the highes tlevel,(ie-above 90 percentile) they’re middle of the pack. Anything below is dead last with ret.
I have a 97 overall parse. Don’t say something so foolish.
Sarahbeth is fully convinced they could balance the game perfectly in a week. Actually delusional.
And the problem with that is? That’s how it’s been for most specs for the whole game’s lifespan.
They could. It’s been done in countless other MMOs for exact situations like this. Ret paladins dmg is about 30 percent lower than wlocks….easy, buff 2 handed weapon weapon damage in pve only by 5 percent. Monitor that for two weeks, and see the outcome. A 5 percent buff like that won’t is impossible to be overpowered, and if it ended up being stronger then you like, dial is back by 2 percent. It’s not rocket science, luckily for them though, they don’t even have to come and say how hard it is and that they can’t do it, you will stay silent through an 800 post thread to finally type and say it’s impossible, when it’s not.
Then it’s been wrong for the entire lifespan.
It’s suddenly a big problem that a bunch of specs are one-ofs and have been this entire time because warrs are not stacked 
You also LITERALLY claimed that you EITHER want fury buffed OR Protpally nerfed.
From an outsiders perspective it is more believable that you are a troll who is engaged to create anti warrior buff propaganda than an actual player that wants a warrior buff, that is the level of destructiveness to your own case you have reached.
Take a look @Sarabeth. Some people agree with him, some dont, but atleast his case is based on the fact that warriors should be buffed in his opinion, and does not consist of only hatred and destructiveness.
One off? Are you a troglodyte? We’re addressing the very bottom of the barrel here? Rets and fury’s, 10-15 specs in between them and the top. Did you know they JUST NOW started doing changes? You find it weird that people are asking for changes when blizzard starts doing changes?? 
Well you’d be wrong, just because you don’t like me doesn’t make me a troll.
Prot paladins are more overpowered compared to the next tank than ret dps was ever behind the pack of dps.
Isn’t Fury fine on multi target fights?
I thought blood and arms were the lowest dps specs (that are somewhat played).
Even if this statement would be 100% true, which is not the case since protpally is only OP on hardhitters specifically, this would still not lead to a logical conclusion of
a) rets should not be buffed
b) fury should be buffed
and thus neither help your agenda of hating rets, nor help your agenda of buffing fury.
All you do is create people that hate you for being dense, which is the worst take possible, since you also believe that blizzard acts on the number of people crying for buffs
so you, all by yourself, is probably the singular biggest reason for fury not getting a buff, due to your astonishing high profile ability to create people that argue against fury buffs.