Poll: Which is the most sought after DPS class for Raiding?

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
8
LastLast
  1. #121
    Deleted
    Has to be a warlock for me, healthstones are so good it's silly!

  2. #122
    Deleted
    Problem with Warlock representation is that they are quite similar to mages and the ordinary casual player prefers playing a mage. Mages/Wizards/whatever are typical RPG class like Warriors and therefore have the highest representation.

    In Raids though Warlocks are represented a lot more than mages because blizzard trys make people play locks instead of mages by making them borderline OP while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.

    The problem is that "the 99%" who play casual wow dont care if warlocks do 10% more DMG than Mages while in raids it leads to benching mages for warlock alts but thats only 1% of the population so it doesnt make a difference.

  3. #123
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Liebchen View Post
    while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.
    Uhm...what?

  4. #124
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Liebchen View Post
    Problem with Warlock representation is that they are quite similar to mages and the ordinary casual player prefers playing a mage. Mages/Wizards/whatever are typical RPG class like Warriors and therefore have the highest representation.

    In Raids though Warlocks are represented a lot more than mages because blizzard trys make people play locks instead of mages by making them borderline OP while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.

    The problem is that "the 99%" who play casual wow dont care if warlocks do 10% more DMG than Mages while in raids it leads to benching mages for warlock alts but thats only 1% of the population so it doesnt make a difference.
    Do you even know what you're talking about?

  5. #125
    For me the problem is I don't have fun watching timers and procs and calculating the optimal time to refresh them, which is what you do as a Warlock. Even Destruction, which only has a single DoT to watch, feels more like playing a game of math than actually using spells to destroy something; you still have to watch procs to know when to refresh Immolate or use Chaos Bolt, when to Havoc (and what), when to use FnB, etc. and I don't find that fun at all. If it was much more streamlined, say you only ever use Chaos Bolt when you have X embers (or better yet make Embers like Combo Points), with a passive that allows such and such frequent ability to refresh Immolate automatically (like Chaos Bolt, for example), etc. it would be more interesting but then you wouldn't have the "skill gap" that so many people love.

  6. #126
    Deleted
    Warlocks, Mages (always OP) and Hunters (can bring any buff that is missing, especially great in 10m)

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobleshield View Post
    For me the problem is I don't have fun watching timers and procs and calculating the optimal time to refresh them, which is what you do as a Warlock. Even Destruction, which only has a single DoT to watch, feels more like playing a game of math than actually using spells to destroy something; you still have to watch procs to know when to refresh Immolate or use Chaos Bolt, when to Havoc (and what), when to use FnB, etc. and I don't find that fun at all. If it was much more streamlined, say you only ever use Chaos Bolt when you have X embers (or better yet make Embers like Combo Points), with a passive that allows such and such frequent ability to refresh Immolate automatically (like Chaos Bolt, for example), etc. it would be more interesting but then you wouldn't have the "skill gap" that so many people love.
    I don't know to which extend this game really needs to go back to two button specs. I mean destruction is incredibly easy to play on a basic level which will provide sufficient performance for easily 90% of the population. Also if the hardest hitting spell in the game doesn't give you the impression of destroying stuff I don't really see anything else that could. Ok, one the hardest hitting spells.
    Last edited by cFortyfive; 2013-10-27 at 03:52 PM.

  8. #128
    Quote Originally Posted by cFortyfive View Post
    I don't know to which extend this game really needs to go back to two button specs. I mean destruction is incredibly easy to play on a basic level which will provide sufficient performance for easily 90% of the population. Also if the hardest hitting spell in the game doesn't give you the impression of destroying stuff I don't really see anything else that could.
    To each their own I enjoyed simplistic specs much more than what we have now. I dusted off my Warlock to try Destro and while it's easy to play at the bare basics, it's not very good play to do so, so I constantly felt like I wasn't performing at even below average efficiency. That's fine though, as I very rarely play my Warlock anyways (and that's partially why).

  9. #129
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Nebmyers View Post
    Do you even know what you're talking about?
    Why do you post if you dont have anything to say? I dont get it why people on this forum browse around just to quote something and give a 5-word answer like "lol thats not true, derp" without contributing anything to the discussion.

    I say warlocks have low representation classwise - which is true go on any census or statistics website.
    I say that warlocks have high representation in raids - which is true go check the roster of any decent heroic raiding guild.
    I say warlocks and mages are quite similar and people tend to rather play a mage because its to more iconic caster class - which is true.
    I say blizzard trys to push warlock numbers and lower mage numbers since tbc - which is true... mages were garbage throughout whole of tbc while lock were OP, in wotlk they were quite equal, in cata warlocks weren't OP but always slightly ahead of mages until DS and in MoP locks are dominating the whole xpac.. Mages were ahead for very short terms for example at the end of T14 or at the end of T15, mostly when content was clear and it didnt matter anyway. AND IM NOT TALKING ABOUT ****ing PVP! Nobody cares about it anymore... if you think mages were always OP just because you got owned by frostmages in PVP the last few years, then cry somewhere else.

    Then you come here and say "heeeerp do you even know what you're talking about derp???" without any more information?

    Go ahead, show me the statistics where the WL-Population is higher than mage. Show me the rosters of good raiding guilds with more mages than warlocks. Tell me about all the times when Warlocks were underpowered. Tell me about progression times where mages were better than warlocks.

    But at least you posted something on a internet forum.

  10. #130
    The one that does big numbers (on the right target), offers the best raid utility, while not standing in crap and getting killed. That class.
    There is no Bad RNG just Bad LTP

  11. #131
    I'm gonna go with Warlocks because MOAR DOTZ
    With Fire and Brimstone I light my path.
    With Pain and Shadow I smite my foes.
    With Demon and Fel I raise my armies.
    I AM WARLOCK, THE END OF YOU ALL.

  12. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by Liebchen View Post
    Why do you post if you dont have anything to say? I dont get it why people on this forum browse around just to quote something and give a 5-word answer like "lol thats not true, derp" without contributing anything to the discussion.
    Usually people consider it not even worth the argument when people say such outlandish things as mages were underpowered TBC onwards.

    Mages practically ruled wrath alongside legendary wielders. They had a hiccup in 4.0 but were straight back up there in 4.1 and being unbeaten the rest of the expansion. In MoP They've had a strong spec (top 5) every patch, but not as strong as warlocks who tend to hold 2-3 of those top 5 spots including no.1.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    which is kind of like saying "of COURSE you can't see the unicorns, unicorns are invisible, silly."

  13. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by judgementofantonidas View Post
    The one that does big numbers (on the right target), offers the best raid utility, while not standing in crap and getting killed. That class.
    So warlocks, since they are kinda immortal!

  14. #134
    Also going with warlocks.

    The reason isn't overall damage for me though.
    The reason is the number of options open to warlocks for means of dealing damage.

    With the number of play options open to warlocks through changing specs, talents and glyphs they can almost always make sure that they are able to deal damage in a useful way.

    A perfect recent example of this is Ra-Den. Destro locks were brilliant for this fight. Their overall damage on the fight wasn't particularly great, and most certainly wasn't considered by anyone to be OP. What was great was their damage on orbs, the most important targets in the fight.

    Another example where the overall damage was exceptional would be Lei Shen, where the aoe burst of demo locks made them perfect for destroying ball lightning. This huge aoe damage made their overall damage very high.


    This is why warlocks are a great addition to a raid, they can change their damage distribution between sustained, burst, single target, multi dot and full on aoe and still be good at all of them.

    It's not that warlocks are top of the pack in every type of combat scenario, it's that there is always a warlock spec that is above average.


    Oh yeah and warlocks have really good survivability options in case the rest wasn't enough.
    Last edited by klogaroth; 2013-10-27 at 05:04 PM.

  15. #135
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Liebchen View Post
    Why do you post if you dont have anything to say? I dont get it why people on this forum browse around just to quote something and give a 5-word answer like "lol thats not true, derp" without contributing anything to the discussion.

    I say warlocks have low representation classwise - which is true go on any census or statistics website.
    I say that warlocks have high representation in raids - which is true go check the roster of any decent heroic raiding guild.
    I say warlocks and mages are quite similar and people tend to rather play a mage because its to more iconic caster class - which is true.
    I say blizzard trys to push warlock numbers and lower mage numbers since tbc - which is true... mages were garbage throughout whole of tbc while lock were OP, in wotlk they were quite equal, in cata warlocks weren't OP but always slightly ahead of mages until DS and in MoP locks are dominating the whole xpac.. Mages were ahead for very short terms for example at the end of T14 or at the end of T15, mostly when content was clear and it didnt matter anyway. AND IM NOT TALKING ABOUT ****ing PVP! Nobody cares about it anymore... if you think mages were always OP just because you got owned by frostmages in PVP the last few years, then cry somewhere else.

    Then you come here and say "heeeerp do you even know what you're talking about derp???" without any more information?

    Go ahead, show me the statistics where the WL-Population is higher than mage. Show me the rosters of good raiding guilds with more mages than warlocks. Tell me about all the times when Warlocks were underpowered. Tell me about progression times where mages were better than warlocks.

    But at least you posted something on a internet forum.
    It's not my job to call you out on some of the most ridiculous statements I have ever read, i'm hoping that by commenting you'd actually come to your senses and edit out the statements that are completely false. But i'll do it for you anyway.

    Plus you didn't even say half of what you just said in your original post.

    Problem with Warlock representation is that they are quite similar to mages and the ordinary casual player prefers playing a mage. Mages/Wizards/whatever are typical RPG class like Warriors and therefore have the highest representation.
    False. Warlocks and Mages are both typical RPG classes. It's just that people have preferences.

    In Raids though Warlocks are represented a lot more than mages because blizzard trys make people play locks instead of mages by making them borderline OP while Mages are rather underpowered since TBC.
    Warlocks are more represented because they bring great dps and a substantial amount of utility. Mages are fine and have been fine for years now. Why bother taking a mage when you can have a gateway, healthstones, be much tankier, bring the same amount of dps, provide spellpower AND stamina (two things that all classes benefit greatly from)

    The problem is that "the 99%" who play casual wow dont care if warlocks do 10% more DMG than Mages while in raids it leads to benching mages for warlock alts but thats only 1% of the population so it doesnt make a difference.
    It's rare that any guild bench a mage for a warlock, If anything they bench another class.
    Last edited by mmoc9cb242d19c; 2013-10-27 at 05:39 PM.

  16. #136
    Warlocks have no damage niches like a typically balanced class. Instead they excel at dealing every type of damage more than every other class. Burst + sustained, Single target? no problem. DoT cleave? no problem. AOE? hell yes. Normal non-god classes have a weakness in one or more of those areas whereas locks do not on top of providing 3 raid utilites : gateway, healthstones, and soulstone rez.

    As if that's not enough they can STILL cast while moving, have a sort of immunity + 2 whole tiers of talents dedicated to personal survivabilty and finally personal port.

    Warlocks just get it all with no drawbacks all because of "low representation". Idk how that justifies one class being literally god of the game for an entire expansion and needing to have 3 viable specs on this one pure when most classes barely had one

  17. #137
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Liebchen View Post
    But at least you posted something on a internet forum.
    You do play a mage, don't you?

  18. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberowl View Post
    So warlocks, since they are kinda immortal!
    All except our former warlock Keigit. Hell of a guy. Good numbers. Oh shit he just stood in something again.
    There is no Bad RNG just Bad LTP

  19. #139
    warlocks and its not even close

  20. #140
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by fappasaurus View Post
    Warlocks have no damage niches like a typically balanced class. Instead they excel at dealing every type of damage more than every other class. Burst + sustained, Single target? no problem. DoT cleave? no problem. AOE? hell yes. Normal non-god classes have a weakness in one or more of those areas whereas locks do not on top of providing 3 raid utilites : gateway, healthstones, and soulstone rez.

    As if that's not enough they can STILL cast while moving, have a sort of immunity + 2 whole tiers of talents dedicated to personal survivabilty and finally personal port.

    Warlocks just get it all with no drawbacks all because of "low representation". Idk how that justifies one class being literally god of the game for an entire expansion and needing to have 3 viable specs on this one pure when most classes barely had one

    Pretty much this. Makes you happy you got a Warlock who gets rank 1# on a lot of fights, since not having one is basically out of the question for any progression focused guild. But although I love our Warlock and love his utility, his dps and his ability to survive where most others will die, I too have to ask, how Blizz can defend Warlocks being so OP for an entire expansion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •