Gc Confirmed

[Natixsphere]

Well then I'd suggest you learn to use the PvP subforum or learn to properly convey all that information in your OP. However though currently in PvP warlocks are still beating 3 other classes in representation 3s and 4 other classes in 5s. They may not be great but they are fine.

Honestly unless you are a rogue or monk you have no right to be bitching about the current representation of your class in PvP.

We are beating 3 other classes... Rogers monks and what disc? Rogues were insanely op in cata there nerf was inevitable. Monks are new and blizzard didn't want to have a repeat of death knight retold and a bran new class being over powered. Warlocks always get nerfs every season and they never make sense I could care less about blood fear but the other nerfs make no sense...

[Nicola]

Well then I'd suggest you learn to use the PvP subforum or learn to properly convey all that information in your OP. However though currently in PvP warlocks are still beating 3 other classes in representation 3s and 4 other classes in 5s. They may not be great but they are fine.

Honestly unless you are a rogue or monk you have no right to be bitching about the current representation of your class in PvP.

Just to say this, but rogues and monks are getting massively buffed while death knights are getting some nice buffs as well.
Not to mention that the sole reason death knights are less represented than us at a higher rating is due blood. Both unholy and frost are actually doing better then any of the warlock speces in 3s. And believe it or not, almost 40% of the death knights you meet in PvP at a lower rating are blood.

Now, what do we warlocks get aside from nerfs and "rather useless buffs"? Green fire and a new spell effect for chaos wave?

-The 10% passive damage reduction from fel armor won't improve our survivability against melee, which we really lack, since a) we lose the armor bonus from fel armor and b) almost every single melee class is getting its damage buffed.
-The QoL change to sacrificial pact only affects those who use a pet, mainly demonology that is.
-The embertap and drain life glyphs are only to make up for the massive loss in selfhealing we got due battle fatigue. Drain life is almost never used and embertap with glyph is a healing loss compared to embertap pre-battlefatigue, so you can't really call it a buff anyway.


Just for the sake of it, I'm going to trow some random numbers here.
Taking a look at the currently 100 highest ranked teams in the world there are:
-1 monk
-3 rogues
-8 warlocks
-10 death knights
-22 mages
-26 priests
-28 hunters
-37 druids
-39 shamans
-45 paladins
-72 warriors

My counting may be 1-2 off on the classes that are 20+, but this should give an idea of how it currently is at top rating.
source

[Natixsphere]

Well affliction works much better with a pet if you ask me so in terms of defense the pet sac will help a lot for aff but it's still not enough tbh...

[Nicola]

Well affliction works much better with a pet if you ask me so in terms of defense the pet sac will help a lot for aff but it's still not enough tbh...

Affliction works with pretty much everything and it doesn't really improve your defense, it just makes it less likely that they'll 2shot your pet after you sacrifice its health.

[Xeraxis]

snip

Oh no two of their specs are beating you in representation by a whole .1% in 3s. Still doesn't change the fact that locks are beating them in total representation in 3s by .5%. But continue to whine that you aren't the top dog I'm sure rogues DKs and monks would gladly take your spot. Still doesn't change the fact that the OP is misleading since currently they are fine and until next season begins we don't know what the rankings will be.

[Natixsphere]

Oh no two of their specs are beating you in representation by a whole .1% in 3s. Still doesn't change the fact that locks are beating them in total representation in 3s by .5%. But continue to whine that you aren't the top dog I'm sure rogues DKs and monks would gladly take your spot. Still doesn't change the fact that the OP is misleading since currently they are fine and until next season begins we don't know what the rankings will be.

Ok just curious what is your arena exp? Warlocks are ok but the way you talk is as if we are a force to be dealt with... Out of dark soul our dmg is horrible at least at higher levels of play... Now for the lower levels a warlock may seem op but that's not the case at all it's generally a l2p issue. Not trying to be rude or anything but the way your describing locks in arena is the same way people with not much exp do..

[Nicola]

Oh no two of their specs are beating you in representation by a whole .1% in 3s. Still doesn't change the fact that locks are beating them in total representation in 3s by .5%. But continue to whine that you aren't the top dog I'm sure rogues DKs and monks would gladly take your spot. Still doesn't change the fact that the OP is misleading since currently they are fine and until next season begins we don't know what the rankings will be.

Every class is fine at 1.5k rating, because people have no idea how to play their class properly, and if I'm not mistaken, that's is your league if I have to believe the lack of certain achievements on your hunter... No offense.

If warlocks were fine, as you say, people would actually be playing the class and not complaining about the terrible state warlocks are in right now. But I'm afraid you are so very wrong here.
The only 2 things that make warlocks sort of viable in 3s right now are blood fear and dark soul, and guess what, blood fear is getting nerfed to the ground. Speaking offensively, we are plain useless outside of dark soul, defensively speaking, we are currently the squishiest caster.

So I ask you, what makes you think warlocks are fine? Are it those 150k chaosbolts that are almost impossible to land or are we talking about the pressure affliction has with haunt up while channeling MG?

[Xeraxis]

So I ask you, what makes you think warlocks are fine? Are it those 150k chaosbolts that are almost impossible to land or are we talking about the pressure affliction has with haunt up while channeling MG?

What makes warlocks fine? Their representation at 2200+ is what makes them fine. That is unless you want to ignore the numbers.

And yes I'm glad you could find my hunter. It's nice to know you are capable of typing my username into the armory and finding one of my accounts. Now use those powers of deduction and look at any site that shows PvP rankings and realize that not all is doom and gloom for locks. They are middle of the road. Nothing to write home about but certainly not something to ignore ,that's usually the case with being middle of the road.

[Natixsphere]

Every class is fine at 1.5k rating, because people have no idea how to play their class properly, and if I'm not mistaken, that's is your league if I have to believe the lack of certain achievements on your hunter... No offense.

If warlocks were fine, as you say, people would actually be playing the class and not complaining about the terrible state warlocks are in right now. But I'm afraid you are so very wrong here.
The only 2 things that make warlocks sort of viable in 3s right now are blood fear and dark soul, and guess what, blood fear is getting nerfed to the ground. Speaking offensively, we are plain useless outside of dark soul, defensively speaking, we are currently the squishiest caster.

So I ask you, what makes you think warlocks are fine? Are it those 150k chaosbolts that are almost impossible to land or are we talking about the pressure affliction has with haunt up while channeling MG?

What makes warlocks fine? Their representation at 2200+ is what makes them fine. That is unless you want to ignore the numbers.

And yes I'm glad you could find my hunter. It's nice to know you are capable of typing my username into the armory and finding one of my accounts. Now use those powers of deduction and look at any site that shows PvP rankings and realize that not all is doom and gloom for locks. They are middle of the road. Nothing to write home about but certainly not something to ignore ,that's usually the case with being middle of the road.

Ok look at any battle group the out of every battle group on the top twenty hell fifty teams there are less than 10 warlocks. So please still explain how warlocks are fine when clearly we are not.

[Lucetia]

all that shows is that afflocks arent bad on any encounter, it doesnt show if they top charts on every encounter, if you take wol it shows something different entirely, as that shows afflocks are good on some encounters(mainly single target encoutners) but gets beaten to a grisp on others.

That's if you take it at face value. As Ghostcrawler mentioned affliction's does too much dps now compared to the other specs and will be brought down some in line with the others. Destruction / Demonology are fine right now and could do really good damge, but you won't see that on World of Logs. Why? Because anyone who is raiding and knows what to do/those who roll specs based on highest dps choose Affliction so the ones left playing the other specs are those who are playing around with it, not sure of what to do, etc so it brings those logs down.

Quick version, don't ever take what World of Logs says as fact.

[Nicola]

What makes warlocks fine? Their representation at 2200+ is what makes them fine. That is unless you want to ignore the numbers.

And yes I'm glad you could find my hunter. It's nice to know you are capable of typing my username into the armory and finding one of my accounts. Now use those powers of deduction and look at any site that shows PvP rankings and realize that not all is doom and gloom for locks. They are middle of the road. Nothing to write home about but certainly not something to ignore ,that's usually the case with being middle of the road.

I think you are interpreting the numbers wrong bro...

But hey, since you love numbers.... talking about 3s above 2.2k.
-Warriors have a 4.8 times higher representation then warlocks.
-Paladins have a 3.7 times higher representation then warlocks.
-Shamans have a 3.4 times higher representation then warlocks.
-hunters have a 2.7 times higher representation then warlocks.
-druids have a 2.6 times higher representation then warlocks.
-priests have a 2.6 times higher representation then warlocks.
-mages have a 2.2 times higher representation then warlocks.

warlocks have a 1.1 times higher representation then deathknights
warlocks have a 2.6 times higher representation then rogues
warlocks have a 6.8 times higher representation then monks
''=> ( This may seem a lot, but I'll just let you know that warriors have a 32.7 times higher representation then monks.



What you see is that 2/3rd of the classes have are at least twice as much representative, going up to 4.8 times as representative in the case of warriors.

Warlocks, death knights, monks and rogues are only representing 10% of the players above 2.2k while warriors, paladins and shamans combined make up for almost 50%
Warriors, paladins, shamans, hunters, druids and priests all have a higher representation than warlocks, death knights, rogues and monks combined.

But now, we are all aware that monks are getting massive buffs, that rogues are getting massive buffs and that death knights are getting nice buffs as well.
On the other hand, warlocks get a very big nerf to blood fear in addition to several other nerfs while only getting a few QoL fixes in return.

Warlocks still fine? I think not.....

[Natixsphere]

^^^ I <3 you!! Lol

Infracted for spam

[ati87]

Ok, I'm currently going through the battlegroupings 3v3 (since its been said that PvP is balanced around 3s) ranking. (Oh, and so there's no confusion, "first warlock" simply means "first team including a warlock". Including where they are when you remove teams without 3 members as I assume those are high-ranking teams that broke and are not applicable). Going from: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/pvp/ not counting the EU, Asian or Oceanic battlegroups.

Bloodlust - First warlock: 8th team
Cyclone - First warlock: 14th team (there is a warlock in 3rd, but it consists of only a warlock)
Emberstorm - First warlock: 3rd team
Nightfall - First warlock: 3rd team (again, 2nd team has a warlock but consists of only warlock and a druid, not counting due to not knowing why it's there)
Rampage - First warlock: 3rd team (seeing a pattern)
Reckoning - First warlock: 2nd team
Retaliation - First warlock 36th team (16th team with 3 members)
Ruin - First warlock: 3rd team
Shadowburn - First warlock: 22nd team (16th with 3 members)
Stormstrike - First warlock: 1st team
Vengence - First warlock: 22nd (13th with 3 members)
Vindication: First warlock: 6th (4th with 3 members)
Whirlwind - First warlock: 3rd team (2nd with 3 members).

Warlocks are consistantly in high rankings in these battlegroups. Yes, there are less Warlocks in these rankings than other classes, but this can be ascribed to personal preference and/or FotMs. If Warlocks were never in the top 20, I would be worried. I don't see why player choice of class should equal a class being bad ingame. Probabality says that even in a perfectly balanced game, certain classes will be played more than other classes, it doesnt make them bad.

Ignoring the argument if warlocks are strong or weak for a moment

But dude your argument is really weak....you just can't take just a small sample size as the highest ranking warlock per battlegroup and call a class fine if that person is particularly high.

lets look at it this way. Hunters for a long time where the weakest class in WoW but their have always been a few hunters that managed to get high rankings. Your argument goes like that 99% of the players are just bad and only 1% of the players of that class are good while every other class has a 90/10 ratio.

[Nicola]

Warlocks are consistantly in high rankings in these battlegroups. Yes, there are less Warlocks in these rankings than other classes, but this can be ascribed to personal preference and/or FotMs. If Warlocks were never in the top 20, I would be worried. I don't see why player choice of class should equal a class being bad ingame. Probabality says that even in a perfectly balanced game, certain classes will be played more than other classes, it doesnt make them bad.

You'll find rogues, monks and death knights in the top 20 as well, following your logic, they are fine as well?

[Xeraxis]

I think you are interpreting the numbers wrong bro...

But hey, since you love numbers.... talking about 3s above 2.2k.
-Warriors have a 4.8 times higher representation then warlocks.
-Paladins have a 3.7 times higher representation then warlocks.
-Shamans have a 3.4 times higher representation then warlocks.
-hunters have a 2.7 times higher representation then warlocks.
-druids have a 2.6 times higher representation then warlocks.
-priests have a 2.6 times higher representation then warlocks.
-mages have a 2.2 times higher representation then warlocks.

warlocks have a 1.1 times higher representation then deathknights
warlocks have a 2.6 times higher representation then rogues
warlocks have a 6.8 times higher representation then monks
''=> ( This may seem a lot, but I'll just let you know that warriors have a 32.7 times higher representation then monks.



What you see is that 2/3rd of the classes have are at least twice as much representative, going up to 4.8 times as representative in the case of warriors.

Warlocks, death knights, monks and rogues are only representing 10% of the players above 2.2k while warriors, paladins and shamans combined make up for almost 50%
Warriors, paladins, shamans, hunters, druids and priests all have a higher representation than warlocks, death knights, rogues and monks combined.

But now, we are all aware that monks are getting massive buffs, that rogues are getting massive buffs and that death knights are getting nice buffs as well.
On the other hand, warlocks get a very big nerf to blood fear in addition to several other nerfs while only getting a few QoL fixes in return.

Warlocks still fine? I think not.....

And since you feel the need to point out that warriors have such a high representation, did you take into consideration the fact that warriors have camped the top spots since the expansion launched due to issues that have since been nerfed? No of course you didn't because that just proves you have no clue what you are talking about. You also fail to mention that hunters received bug fixes as well which would have lowered their representation. Taking both those into consideration is it any wonder that Paladins, Shamans, Druids, and Priests are at the top of representation given the fact that they can also heal? You're going to have to try harder to make your case if that's all you got.

[Nicola]

And since you feel the need to point out that warriors have such a high representation, did you take into consideration the fact that warriors have camped the top spots since the expansion launched due to issues that have since been nerfed? No of course you didn't because that just proves you have no clue what you are talking about. You also fail to mention that hunters received bug fixes as well which would have lowered their representation. Taking both those into consideration is it any wonder that Paladins, Shamans, Druids, and Priests are at the top of representation given the fact that they can also heal? You're going to have to try harder to make your case if that's all you got.

Have you taken in consideration there are also warlocks camping their spots from the days they could 2shot whole teams with chaos wave?
And iirc correctly, those hunter fixes were done before they resetted all mmr and ratings back to 2.2.

I rest my case.

[Purpleisbetter]

3 seconds cast in arena?

3 second channel in arena?

CHARGESTUNPUMMELDISRUPTINGSHOUTSHOCKWAVESTORMBOLTCHARGESTUNPUMMELFEARDISRUPTINGSHOUTSHOCKW AVEDISRUPTINGSHOUTSTORMBOLTFEARSILENCEPUMMELCHARGESTUNETCETC...

Madness.

[silverhatred]

I remember when we had far less defensive options and affliction was the only spec you could play competitively in pvp and when people failed to use those tools correctly and complained about being terrible they were told otherwise. I also remember when this mmo-c warlock community wasn't full of the people it has now. Makes me glad I main switched, I will probably not come here anymore due to being full of flaming and armory heroes. You were good while it lasted I guess.

[Docmort]

And since you feel the need to point out that warriors have such a high representation, did you take into consideration the fact that warriors have camped the top spots since the expansion launched due to issues that have since been nerfed? No of course you didn't because that just proves you have no clue what you are talking about. You also fail to mention that hunters received bug fixes as well which would have lowered their representation. Taking both those into consideration is it any wonder that Paladins, Shamans, Druids, and Priests are at the top of representation given the fact that they can also heal? You're going to have to try harder to make your case if that's all you got.

I love these other classes coming on here and telling us we're fine, trying to misinterpret or brush away pertinent data and telling us to stop complaining. Like Niberion said, if we're taking into account rate camping, we should still see plenty of warlocks sitting high up there from destro and demo god mode days. 5's don't count for anything, game is balanced around 3's. Also you continue to try to say dk's have a worse representation when actually the specs that are MEANT to pvp with are both doing better than any warlock spec.

Regardless, those 4 low rep classes, the ones sitting under 5%, guess what: even blizzard knows they're not fine. No one here is arguing monks and rogues don't have it bad, and Blizz acknowledged it and gave them über buffs. DK's are also getting buffs. Warlocks get minor buffs which would have been nice except the crutch we used to depend on, the undeniably broken blood fear, is being cut down to a shadow of its previous glory. To add to this, the meta game will shift more melee heavy despite warriors being taken down a peg. With great confidence I predict, that without a pretty significant change, warlock high arena rating will dip to the lowest we've seen. What makes it worse is that GC has been hinting that we are getting close to number tweaking, when we're at that stage they stop making mechanics changes because it throw fine tuning out of whack.

---------- Post added 2013-01-26 at 07:39 AM ----------

I remember when we had far less defensive options and affliction was the only spec you could play competitively in pvp and when people failed to use those tools correctly and complained about being terrible they were told otherwise. I also remember when this mmo-c warlock community wasn't full of the people it has now. Makes me glad I main switched, I will probably not come here anymore due to being full of flaming and armory heroes. You were good while it lasted I guess.

Makes sense why you think that way then, when you can't see that you're main has fundamental issues that make it hard to operate. You keep saying cd's but warlock defense is actually worse off than it's been in previous expansions. We don't have baseline soul link that doesn't kill us, no self heals, our armor is nowhere near what it used to be and 2 cc's that used to be baseline (3 for demo) have now been made into a choice between them. Blizz thought the cd's would make up for all this, ask any warlock trying to push rating if it has, I bet most of them would drop the cd's in an instant for the old model.

[Last Starfighter]

Affliction is the best pvp spec in the game. There is no substitute.