POLL: Make 1h dual-wielding available for all specs

[Bearshield]

I see no reason for Arms to dual wield 1 handed weapons, the spec is designed around using a 2h weapon, not dual wielding. Now I do not understand why the ability to dual wield was taken away from Prot. It was very handy for a Warrior OT.

[Kavaren]

I cant believe the ignorance in this thread.

<<<Warriors could dual wield 1h weapons from vanilla/bc/wotlk and it was inexplicably removed for Cataclysm>>>

As in BASELINE once you've leveled some/quested for stances etc if I recall correctly. It's something one can do for 5 years then suddenly cant - I still catch myself reaching to swap at times.

The only effect on PvE this had is that prot can't execute as much. This compounds the existing issue of being able to do little without a boss or pack of mobs on you. You also cannot sport your legendaries (which you also cannot transmog to).

I REPEAT this was an ability every warrior had! Without spending any talent points. This guy isnt smoking rocks in asking it be PUT BACK ty.

[asharia]

How can any of you vote 'no'?

None of you are true warriors.

I cant believe the ignorance in this thread.

<<<Warriors could dual wield 1h weapons from vanilla/bc/wotlk and it was inexplicably removed for Cataclysm>>>

As in BASELINE once you've leveled some/quested for stances etc if I recall correctly. It's something one can do for 5 years then suddenly cant - I still catch myself reaching to swap at times.

The only effect on PvE this had is that prot can't execute as much. This compounds the existing issue of being able to do little without a boss or pack of mobs on you. You also cannot sport your legendaries (which you also cannot transmog to).

I REPEAT this was an ability every warrior had! Without spending any talent points. This guy isnt smoking rocks in asking it be PUT BACK ty.

It still wouldnt have much effect on prot, as you cannot devastate anymore without a shield.

I still cannot work out why they put these stupid restriction in. The only time it was broken was for a couple of weeks during 3.0 when arms has a semi viable DW 1h axes build, which revolved around 45-50% crit and a ton of sudden death procs, which at that time, gave you executes.

[Protoman]

I support it. Warriors are the weapon masters and should be able to use a variety of weapons as well as weapon combo's. If an arms warrior can switch to 1h and shield, they should be able to use DW weapons as well. Obviously 2H will give arms more dps but no reason to deny them the option for fun or style or whatever.

[Rhyseh]

It would be nice to be able to equip 2 x 1 handers in other specs again. It would mean I could update my SMF spec and inspect my caps etc without having to go waste gold on a respec.

Considering there was NEVER any problems from this in the past I am a little confused as to why it was removed. It's a change that made no sense.

The OP is NOT asking for them to be raid viable sets (in fact they would be useless) just that we can equip those main hand/off hand sets that we had been able to in the past. Like the vanilla one handers that can turn you into a cat, it would be nice to dick around with those again just to look awesome.

[Bearshield]

as you cannot devastate anymore without a shield.

This was kinda my point, why was that change necessary in the first place? I fail to see how prot warriors being able to somewhat dps when not tanking was OP.

[Zardi]

One of the things Blizzard is trying to accomplish with the newest talent system is avoiding "death traps" for the less skilled or knowledgeable people. By completely disallowing the use of Dual-Wield for Arms and Protection they ensure that absolutely nobody will be misled and attempt to do ultra-deadly MS with a one-hander or to tank without a shield.

Personally I agree that DW looks and feels cool, even if you're not fury; although the fact that the OP is more concerned about e-peen than anything else is something I can't show any simpathy for. In any case, cool or not, if it's not going to be viable then it's a trap, and as such it has no place in the current talent model.

[Protoman]

One of the things Blizzard is trying to accomplish with the newest talent system is avoiding "death traps" for the less skilled or knowledgeable people. By completely disallowing the use of Dual-Wield for Arms and Protection they ensure that absolutely nobody will be misled and attempt to do ultra-deadly MS with a one-hander or to tank without a shield.

Personally I agree that DW looks and feels cool, even if you're not fury; although the fact that the OP is more concerned about e-peen than anything else is something I can't show any simpathy for. In any case, cool or not, if it's not going to be viable then it's a trap, and as such it has no place in the current talent model.

They are dumbing down the game and restricting classes from having fun or having options to protect the clueless and stupid. It's sad. Those players will suck no matter what, it's not hard to take 10 min and research or read a faq or noxxic or whatever.

[inboundpaper]

I want it back to show off my fancy zg fist weps without keeping a fury spec.

[AFK-Champion]

This was kinda my point, why was that change necessary in the first place? I fail to see how prot warriors being able to somewhat dps when not tanking was OP.

Because you could go in prot just for devastate and then go for fury talents, it was during beta or whatever, because pre cataclysm talents allowed very hybrid combinations.
It changed game for prot as well, but very marginally - most disarm effects are not preventing devastate anymore.

[Bearshield]

Because you could go in prot just for devastate and then go for fury talents, it was during beta or whatever, because pre cataclysm talents allowed very hybrid combinations.
It changed game for prot as well, but very marginally - most disarm effects are not preventing devastate anymore.

Yes, I've had my Warrior since vanilla, I remember the hybrid builds you used to be able to make. I still don't see how it was an issue for prot warriors to be able to dual wield when not tanking something. It's no different than a Druid being able to go cat (yes, I am aware that is being nerfed in MoP, they still have access to some very basic dps abilities and tank in dps gear) or a DK switching presences. In fact, I think Warriors are the only class who suffers a penalty to their dps when not tanking. I'm not suggesting that Warriors should be topping meters, but being able to dw was hardly OP.

[Judge Malthred]

If you make one thing avilable to all specs, what's the point of having different specs?

Because it's not a mechanic. Like the guy before you said: Some DK specs are 2h only as far as viability is concerned but that doesn't prevent them from being able to equip 2 1h weapons no matter what their spec.

I agree with OP, don't see a reason why they felt they needed to prevent a warrior from being able to equip 2 weapons in certain specs.

[Gourmandises]

This has been suggested on the forum before and this was my answer:

I don't want to see retard Arms people dual-wielding...


But yes let's put it back, so people have a reason not to read all the Arms tooltips and notice the damage is actually done with a 2-hander instead of 2 1-handers. And protection needs a shield. Really, why all the crying? Epeen much?

[flaggel]

Could be way to op for some classes, imagine dual wielding 2 maws of madness

[Swaggah]

They are dumbing down the game and restricting classes from having fun or having options to protect the clueless and stupid. It's sad. Those players will suck no matter what, it's not hard to take 10 min and research or read a faq or noxxic or whatever.

Kinda ironic, because you're referring to the exact thing that made this change happen. Misinformation and lack of information

I voted no, because I don't the reason too other then looking flashy. Which is the lowest of the lowest priority

[asharia]

Could be way to op for some classes, imagine dual wielding 2 maws of madness

They're mainhand only...

[Mesovr]

Kinda ironic, because you're referring to the exact thing that made this change happen. Misinformation and lack of information

I voted no, because I don't the reason too other then looking flashy. Which is the lowest of the lowest priority

Then they should "fix" it for death knights as well. Holding a double standart is stupid.

[NPEC]

I remenber in TBC to be in a group with protection spec and gear exept for the fact i was using 2 1h swords cause one of the menbers of the group asked if he could try tanking, ofc my dmg wanst good but it was fun to duelwield as protection.

In short, the dualwiielding skill to all classes dodent have to be efective but more a fun thing you can do when you are just relaxing in easy to average content.

[Jiraden]

Title is kind of misleading, but still doesn't merit all of the d-bag responses the OP is getting. Should have never even used the word "specs" in title, rather just said that dual wield should still be a trained lvl 10 warrior ability much like we train plate at 40.