Build 8962 - Warrior changes.

I could do the typical WoW Forums post here, list off each little change in the build, make a small comment about it, and move on to the next ability. That's boring. If you've actually bothered to come to this blog you deserve something a bit more. So let's look at the bigger picture of what the 8962 changes mean for the Warrior.

First of all, they tried to address the Plate vs Leather Itemization issue by giving Fury a Tier 1 Talent that converts 400 Armor to 1/2/3 str. This is a noob trap for the most part, and only strengthens the argument of the few failure Warriors who don't think we should wear leather to begin with. You've seen the types, "Ugh, I'd never wear leather." Yeah, well you're bad, I wouldn't expect you to wear leather.


http://static.mmo-champion.com/mmoc/images/news/2008/september/naxxramas_25_150.jpg
http://static.mmo-champion.com/mmoc/images/news/2008/september/naxxramas_25_85.jpg

The difference between these 2 pieces of armor is roughly 13(14-15 with Kings) Str(26-30AP) vs 1.25% Critical Strike. Leather itemization is still far and away better for most Warriors. What will Blizzard end up doing about this? Either 1 of 2 things, ignore it, content that their solution with this new talent will keep (Bad)Warriors from taking leather, or nerf the agility to critical strike conversion Warriors get. Time will tell which wins out.

This talent isn't all bad mind you, Protection Warriors who drop the 3 points into it will get a cool 150 Strength(This is just assuming 20000 Armor) or so off of it, not much more to say there.

Issue 2) Arms vs Fury Part Deux...Trux? I've lost count.

Fury lost Heroic Leap in this build, believe me when I say we're better off. For those of you not in beta, it was a horribly buggy talent that just never worked correctly, it had very limited applications, and it's replacement in Heroic Fury is much, much better. However when I saw Fury get this new talent, it was as if I heard thousands of Arms Warriors cry out foul....and I chuckled. I won't lie about this, I have a small portion of hatred for the Arms tree, it has treated me right at times, specifically talking PvP, but I was asked/forced to spec Blood Frenzy just one too many times, so whenever I see them miss out on something I chuckle. However karma is a bitch, I must learn to embrace this tree for it is a part of my class, it wasn't the Arms tree's fault I was a Blood Frenzy bitch....in a farm status instance....for a few months. *Shakes fist in air* Ahem...moving on. >_>

In the latest build, Blood Frenzy got a nice little boast in the form of 3/6% haste in addition to providing 2% physical damage for the raid/Warrior. In response to this, Fury Warriors cried foul, which caused me to chuckle, yes I'm evil, everyone gets it, back on topic though. To start off with, let's face facts, Rampage in a raiding environment will be pointless, those cuddly bear tanks(Druids for those of you new to my term for them) have the same ability, there is almost ALWAYS one in a raid nowadays, and it has a 100% uptime, it's superior to Rampage in every way, and Rampage can no longer be consumed for that Enraged Assault, since it was removed a few patches back. Ghostcrawler posted in the same thread talking about the latest Warrior changes that Blood Frenzy was a selfless talent, while Rampage isn't something Warriors would pass on because they like 5% crit, I hope Ghostcrawler reconsiders this stance, because I'm content with spending my 1 point elsewhere and allowing my cuddly bear counterparts to keep it up for me in a raid environment. Outside of a raid environment, she's right, I'd take that point, it's well worth it, and I'd never spend additional gold just to respec out of it weekly(The beauty shop is going to consume all my gold as is.), but that doesn't make it right that Rampage doesn't get some sort of pat on the head for...umm..buffing the raid? Or not buffing the raid when the Druid is alive...ok you see my problem with Rampage?

More as it comes to me.

Warrior Stance Penalties

So I started this thread over on the beta forums about how Warrior Stances are this ridiculous outdated concept(And they are in light of the Death Knights). I don't think it's out of the question to request a change to at the very least the penalties that Defensive Stance and Berserker Stance have. However when I see that there has been no response from the developers on the issue it irritates me. The thread in question is one of the longest on the forums, and also one of the most active ones, I made it well over a month ago.

My main complaint about the stances when I made this thread were the penalties.

I even like having different abilities usable in each stance(Though if they're pushing Battle Stance as THE stance for Arms, they need to make some drastic changes).

The fact that our stance buffs look pathetic when compared to Death Knight's presence buffs is an entirely different issue all together, which is also why it's understandable that you have all these Warriors in that thread and on those boards requesting buffs to each stance in addition to the removal of the penalties. I'm sure on some level Blizzard knew this would be the case when they released Presences for Death Knights.

I like to think I have a fairly good understanding of why Blizzard at times just completely ignore certain topics, my thoughts on why they won't respond to this particular complaint are along the lines of:

"They have no intention of changing it and they would like to look at other avenues to adjust(Not buff/nerf) Warriors, so there's no point in telling Warriors this, as it would only create additional anger on their boards."

There's no real polite way to say "We want you doing 10% less damage in this stance, taking 10% more damage in this stance, and this stance to doing nothing." It's different from for example, the Divine Spirit thread on the Priest forums where they can say "We won't make Divine Spirit trainable, because we want a Disc Priest to be invited to raids." There's actual sense behind a statement like that, and it's simple to explain. Stance Penalties probably have a lot deeper and or/more complex reasons, or at least I hope they do, because I thought I understood them when they were introduced 3(4?) years ago. Apparently this isn't the case.