Upcoming change to taunt

[Riggswolfe]

Blizzard wrote:

Taunt: removed rage cost and global cooldown

Thread here

I wonder if that is just a typo about removing rage cost? I can see lowering it. If you remove it, man taunt spam will be greater than before, though I'll have rage to do other things.

I find it interesting since they said the taunt changes were because warriors were never intended to hold so much aggro.

[MrHat]

Blizzard wrote:

Taunt: removed rage cost and global cooldown

Thread here

I wonder if that is just a typo about removing rage cost? I can see lowering it. If you remove it, man taunt spam will be greater than before, though I'll have rage to do other things.

I find it interesting since they said the taunt changes were because warriors were never intended to hold so much aggro.

Ya, I saw that.

Does that mean it works like taunt in CoH now?

[stray]

I'm just a noob, and I don't know much about Warriors yet. This upcoming patch seems it'll make a lot of tanks happy, but the rest are still bitchin'. They need to fix Warriors a little more before enough people starting pointing towards Paladins and cry for nerfs. Fuck, people are crying for Pali nerfs in that very thread. What they're not taking into account, I think, is that Paladin uber-damage is proc/crit based. Uber, yes, dependable, no. They probably shouldn't be better tanks though (I don't know if they are, I haven't taken any Protection skills myself, but that's what Warriors say).

Anyways, my off-topic two cents (apologies). Whatever it is solo and PvP warriors are bitching about, I hope Blizzard gives them something worth playing (though it's hard for me to believe every other class owns them). I'd just hate to see Paladins become shit on release day because of this.

[MrHat]

I'm just a noob, and I don't know much about Warriors yet. This upcoming patch seems it'll make a lot of tanks happy, but the rest are still bitchin'. They need to fix Warriors a little more before enough people starting pointing towards Paladins and cry for nerfs. Fuck, people are crying for Pali nerfs in that very thread. What they're not taking into account, I think, is that Paladin uber-damage is proc/crit based. Uber, yes, dependable, no. They probably shouldn't be better tanks though (I don't know if they are, I haven't taken any Protection skills myself, but that's what Warriors say).

Anyways, my off-topic two cents (apologies). Whatever it is solo and PvP warriors are bitching about, I hope Blizzard gives them something worth playing (though it's hard for me to believe every other class owns them). I'd just hate to see Paladins become shit on release day because of this.

Are you talking about that War. Vs. Unarmed Pally video that's been floating around? Because if you are, that thing is shit.  All the warrior has to do is switch to shield and he wins.

[Kageru]

Part of the taunt change was it getting a 10 second cool-down. So unless they remove that as well taunt-spam is not an issue. As far as I can understand itthey screwed up because they added a +aggro modifier to all warrior damage. But since offensive stances are better for delivering specials and damage this left defensive stance inferior for tanking.

The logic of what blizzard is doing still seems sound. But the ability of the current userbase to adapt to change, or even make sense, is negligible.

[stray]

Are you talking about that War. Vs. Unarmed Pally video that's been floating around? Because if you are, that thing is shit.  All the warrior has to do is switch to shield and he wins.

No, not that. I'm just talking about the changes from last patch. It requires some managing of seals, but Retribution/2H can be seriously insane. Plus, they can still be made as good tanks if that's what people want.

Warriors, on the other hand, aren't getting that kind of treatment in all aspects.

[El Gallo]

We'll have to see how the "increased aggro in defensive stance" part works out, because if taunt is still "top of the aggro list +1" it will still be annoying as hell on large pulls.

The real problem is that dungeons were designed for the old taunt.  If they want to reduce warriors' cc skills, they need to redesign those dungeons, or introduce some EQ-ish pulling or CC skills for other classes.

[Dren]

I played a warrior for awhile and noticed that no matter how good my armor and shields were I kept getting damaged the same.  It just didn't feel like I was tanking much at all when looking at the other classes.  

I've tried several other classes now and they do a lot better with damage output to taken than my warrior did by far.  I just assumed armor points were borked and/or the warrior class because it sure felt broken to me.

Taunt really doesn't even touch the issues I saw.  Of course, I never got him past level 12, so maybe the class gets much better at higher levels.

[Xanthippe]

I've played a warrior to 28, and have had the same experience regarding armor and damage taken.  I have a really hard time building rage and keeping aggro in groups since the changes.  I usually group with a shaman and a rogue, both of whom outdamage me.  

I can't really see what unique role a warrior plays.  Rogues seem to take damage as well as me (through evades and dodges) yet dish out 2x my amount.  Shamans tank as well, can heal and res, and outdamage me too.

Either the class is broken or I'm not playing it right.

(By the way, I'm a long time reader, but new poster,  the f13 community.  Greetings, all.)

[Dren]

Good, I'm not the only one screwing up my warrior character.  I'm usually pretty good at keeping a character viable in these games unless they are a broken class.  I tend to believe it is the latter.

[Morfiend]

I played a warrior up to lvl 48 in closed beta, pvp server, and up until the last patch, was convinced that I would be playing warrior at release. But with all these changes the class is just not as fun to play any more and I am deciding between Rogue and Warlock for release now.

[MrHat]

I played a warrior up to lvl 48 in closed beta, pvp server, and up until the last patch, was convinced that I would be playing warrior at release. But with all these changes the class is just not as fun to play any more and I am deciding between Rogue and Warlock for release now.

Heh, infernal is a novelty so I hear.

[Morfiend]

I played a warrior up to lvl 48 in closed beta, pvp server, and up until the last patch, was convinced that I would be playing warrior at release. But with all these changes the class is just not as fun to play any more and I am deciding between Rogue and Warlock for release now.

Heh, infernal is a novelty so I hear.

But the Felhunter is nasty. Has a bunch of anti caster abilities. Also, a group of Warlocks using Hellfire is amazing to see. If you time it right, a group of 4 warlocks and a priest could do over 6k PBAE damage in around 6 seconds.

[Dren]

I played a warrior up to lvl 48 in closed beta, pvp server, and up until the last patch, was convinced that I would be playing warrior at release. But with all these changes the class is just not as fun to play any more and I am deciding between Rogue and Warlock for release now.

I spent the last night of OB playing my warrior again to try and figure out what I was doing wrong to make it "not fun to play."  I finally figured out why I have more fun with the other classes.

Mainly it has to do with two things.  One is that the whole concept of using the warrior skills is backward from the other classes.  You have to start giving damage to be able to use a skill.  Plus, you have to give out large damage to get rage quickly.  All the while you are taking damage.  So, you are essentially 1/2 dead before you can start cranking out the special moves.

The other problem is that the warrior is highly dependent on his/her equipment.  I finally saved up enough to get a mace that was twice as damaging as the other and my rage started to go up quicker.  With both the damage increase and the increased use of special moves I started doing well again.

You see less of these issues with the other classes, even with other melee classes like rogue and paladin.  All the other classes allow you to rest to get mana back and then start blasting that creature right away.  The tables are now turned so that the creature has 1/2 life before they even get started on hurting you.  It just feels more powerful and safer in comparison.

Plus, the other classes are less dependent on equipment.  A druid or mage casts their spells just as well without a nice staff and with.  Sure they need their armor for defense, but typically their battle is won on distance moves alone.  If the creature isn't 1/2 dead by the time it gets to them, they are dead themselves.

I've decided that warriors are really the best suited for group play.  If they can be continuously hitting things and getting healed, they can do quite well, but they have to have the best equipment they can get at all times to be viable.

As things stand, I predict you won't see very many warriors a month after release.  They'll all switch to rogues and paladins.

[Der Helm]

You see less of these issues with the other classes, even with other melee classes like rogue and paladin.  All the other classes allow you to rest to get mana back and then start blasting that creature right away.  The tables are now turned so that the creature has 1/2 life before they even get started on hurting you.  It just feels more powerful and safer in comparison.

Atually my rogue was at 15-20 % health after almost every battle. Might be because of my playstyle, but at least at the very low levels I played with a warrior, I never had this feeling of "living on the edge" .

[Mesozoic]

In Bliz's defense, they do explicitly state that the Warrior is gear-dependant.  Why did they do it that way?  I have no idea.

[Dren]

Atually my rogue was at 15-20 % health after almost every battle. Might be because of my playstyle, but at least at the very low levels I played with a warrior, I never had this feeling of "living on the edge" .

True, but with the rogue you have been using your special moves the whole time and if you manage your mana correctly, you can put out some nice finishing moves.  Plus, if you miss you can try again.  The warrior is dead if he misses all of the time, no damage, no built up rage, no special moves.  To me, I felt like running with a warrior before I even started doing any real damage.  For the rogue, the running instinct was more at the end when both you and the creature were about to die.  I like the rogue situation better.  To each his own though.

In Bliz's defense, they do explicitly state that the Warrior is gear-dependant. Why did they do it that way? I have no idea.

Yes, I'm not  saying this is a bad way to go.  It just has a different appeal.  While I like messing around with items, I don't know if I want to be so dependent on them.  A warrior is severly weakened with subpar equipment.

[stray]

Palidans are just as gear dependent too. There aren't any differences there. As for the other things, yeah, they are a better overall class. I'll be playing one myself. Not only are they fun, but I also have a feeling this class won't ever be nerfed too badly...Could be wrong though. My reasoning is that there's a bias in the Warcraft world for them. They're the flagship characters of the RTS games.

Anyways, back to gear dependency: it isn't necessarily a bad thing. It just as well works for you as it does against you, especially when everyone finally has their skills and plays the end game (whatever that may be).

[Dren]

I didn't play a paladin too long, but from what I saw their buffs were more powerful than the warrior natural class buffs.  yes, you have to cast them over and over, but they are there.

It might not be a huge factor in lessening the effect equipment has on them but I felt like it did some.  Overall though, they are very equipment dependent, yes.

Edit:  Oh, plus they can heal.  That widens some of the gap between them and warriors.

[sidereal]

The warrior is dead if he misses all of the time, no damage, no built up rage, no special moves.

Don't you also get rage from taking damage?

[MrHat]

The warrior is dead if he misses all of the time, no damage, no built up rage, no special moves.

Don't you also get rage from taking damage?

Yes, and there is an autogenerate rage ability in defensive stance.

Oh, and props to your avatar.

[Dren]

Well then my warrior is broken because he did not gain rage by being damaged.  He only gained it by giving damage and it was directly proportional to how much damage too.

The autogenerate skill you mention is the one that also makes your hps go down if I'm not mistaken (I probably am.)  Anyway, I didn't notice my rage increasing by just being in defense mode.

[El Gallo]

The upside of being gear-dependent is that you can keep getting more powerful once you hit max level.  Casters cannot do that so well, and Blizzard has done a piss-poor job on caster itemization.   I give 6 weeks before "World of Meleecraft" is a catch phrase on the official boards.

[Mesozoic]

The upside of being gear-dependent is that you can keep getting more powerful once you hit max level.  Casters cannot do that so well, and Blizzard has done a piss-poor job on caster itemization.   I give 6 weeks before "World of Meleecraft" is a catch phrase on the official boards.

To me, when I hear that Warriors are "gear-dependant," I imagine that they need better gear than their buddies to be on par with a member of another class at the same level.  I don't necessarily see it as an advantage at 60 or any other level.  Time will tell.

On the general topic of the potential warrior weakness, it will be interesting to see the relative Horde/Alliance reaction.  The Alliance, of course, will float towards the Paladin.  The Horde will have to migrate to the Rogue.  Then BGs come in.  Place your bets!

[MrHat]

On the general topic of the potential warrior weakness, it will be interesting to see the relative Horde/Alliance reaction.  The Alliance, of course, will float towards the Paladin.  The Horde will have to migrate to the Rogue.  Then BGs come in.  Place your bets!

I'm pretty sure there will be an absurd amount of Shamans.  It's the more offensive paladin.

[El Gallo]

It's a big advantage if you are willing/able to get the gear.  Tanking and weapon using classes keep getting much better and better after level 60 as their gear gets much better and better.  Mages only see small increases from gear.  Once they have their level 60 spells, their progression is essentially over.

It's a double edged sword.  A naked warrior sucks compared to a naked mage.  A mage decked out in the best gear in the game sucks compared to a warrior decked out in the best gear in the game.

[Kageru]

Yep. Gear inflation favors the gear dependant, as happened in EQ. And Blizzard often seem to miss that +1 and +1% are rather drastically different beasts. On the other hand at least they are aware of it. Casters do have a no-mana, equipment dependant damage source (wands) and there are casting focuses on gear, but it's pretty un-impressive so far. Which might be a good thing, gear inflation does it's own damage to a game.

[Disco Stu]

On the general topic of the potential warrior weakness, it will be interesting to see the relative Horde/Alliance reaction.  The Alliance, of course, will float towards the Paladin.  The Horde will have to migrate to the Rogue.  Then BGs come in.  Place your bets!

Personally playing as a priest up to lvl 30 I can say at least in my experance that Paladins can't tank worth shit compared to Warriors. Because of the abundance of Paladins I find myself grouping with them constantly. In my experance they can't hold almost any agro. Pallys are a good 2nd or 3rd tank because of their damage output, healing abilitys, auras and seals. But a full group with only a pally or two as their main tanks is pretty fucked if they want to start pushing themselves to the edge. Personally I think the class that needs the most help right now is the druid. I know their supposed to be a jack of all trades class but I think they need some more powerful spells in human form. I'm not sure what kind of cc they have now (only grouped with a total of about 3 and cc wasn't an issue) but if they gave them some good cc I could really see them being usful in a full group. With their healing and damage abilitys mixed in theyd be worth having around over say another tank.

[Nebu]

Personally playing as a priest up to lvl 30 I can say at least in my experance that Paladins can't tank worth shit compared to Warriors. Because of the abundance of Paladins I find myself grouping with them constantly. In my experance they can't hold almost any agro. Pallys are a good 2nd or 3rd tank because of their damage output, healing abilitys, auras and seals. But a full group with only a pally or two as their main tanks is pretty fucked if they want to start pushing themselves to the edge. Personally I think the class that needs the most help right now is the druid. I know their supposed to be a jack of all trades class but I think they need some more powerful spells in human form. I'm not sure what kind of cc they have now (only grouped with a total of about 3 and cc wasn't an issue) but if they gave them some good cc I could really see them being usful in a full group. With their healing and damage abilitys mixed in theyd be worth having around over say another tank.

So begins the era of the "ideal group".  Many people felt early on that the diversity and power among classes would prevent the "uberization" of groups.  I give the 1337 guilds about a week until they find the group they can PL the fastest.  I saw this coming down the pike in early beta.

Once PvP becomes more popular, you'll start to see idealized groups comprised of very specific class combinations.  Just don't say that I didn't warn you.

[El Gallo]

Warriors were something like 25% of the population at some point during the closed beta.  They are less powerful now, but I think it will remain one of the most popular classes.  A lot of people just plain like the idea of walking up to a baddie and smacking it in the face with a big sharp/blunt/pointy thing.

[Mesozoic]

It also helps that Warriors have their very own game mechanics to them (rage/stance).  In other games, Fighters are just people with bags of HP and permission to wear plate.

[sidereal]

Once PvP becomes more popular, you'll start to see idealized groups comprised of very specific class combinations.  Just don't say that I didn't warn you.

Is it even possible to avoid that?  Given a competitive environment and a lot of repetition, people will hardcore optimize.  Survival of the fittest and so on.  The only way to avoid it I can see is to have enough variety in the encounters you face that a single party build won't solve all problems.  As long as combat is always some minor variant of pull/mez/taunt/tank/nuke/repeat, optimal groups will exist.  If half the mobs in the game were mez-proof, or had wildly different algorithms for target selection, or there was a subtantial difference between magic damage and other kinds of damage, etc, that might not be the case.

GW might be able to avoid it, with the variety in skills you might face.  But I give it at least a 50/50 chance that it settles into an equilibrium where there's a given set of uber-skills that everyone takes.

Oh, and props to your avatar.

I had a fever.  And the only prescription was more cowbell.

[AlteredOne]

GW might be able to avoid it, with the variety in skills you might face.  But I give it at least a 50/50 chance that it settles into an equilibrium where there's a given set of uber-skills that everyone takes.

I'm giving GW fair odds of pulling this off, because of the huge number of "countermeasure" skills.  The really smart groups will make a science of dissecting their opponent's skills, and adjusting their own skill set between battles.  Stalemate yes, but a good stalemate like chess :)

[Venkman]

I enjoyed my Warrior, but I'm really much more a caster sorta guy, and in WoW have a hard time choosing between Mage and Warlock. Heck, every class feels like a hybrid to me, even the Warrior for a time. But the Mage and Warlock abilities offer me options I like the most, particularly when complemented with Herbalism and Alchemy.

Casters do have a no-mana, equipment dependant damage source (wands) and there are casting focuses on gear, but it's pretty un-impressive so far. Which might be a good thing, gear inflation does it's own damage to a game.

In my experience, Wands sorta sucked. The only time they're useful is when the player blew through their mana. Wand DPS is not really much different from good spell DPS, given the level ratings on them. I would argue that a player has better DPS if they employ better mana management than they would if they just overnuked and then Wand'd the rest. This in both solo and group situations. Besides, in groups, overnuking just means a Priest has to waste mana on a class that shouldn't be drawing aggro anyway (though the PBAoE Root on the Mage and the Voidwalker on the Warlock are good defense against over aggroing.

But that's just been my experience. I haven't heard many casters bothering with Wands too much, but that could change if they started getting better or if they started giving the caster an ability they didn't already have (like a Root for a Warlock or a nice debuff for the Mage).

Every character caps out levels, Talents, and equipment eventually. A Warrior's DPS is tied to their weaponry and Talent, as well as their ability to not die from holding aggro. But that's their role. Every class can benefit from better stats though, or items that given secondary benefits. That doesn't make the Warrior unique in this regard, though I will agree they are the primary market for the "best" equipment.

Which is fine.

And what the ubers do really doesn't matter, except for those interested in being uber.

[trias_e]

Except when they kick your ass in PvP.  Then it matters that they are the ultra-supreme-catass-elite.