Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
LastLast
  1. #81
    Scarab Lord nightfalls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    4,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    I have seen applications to my former guild that said "I want to join because I want to do X but the guild I am in keep asking me to do Y".
    Then they obviously didn't belong in that guild, if the guild was unwilling to accept the role that a player applied to do. So there's nothing wrong with them apping out, whichever class they play.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    I have seen players leave guilds I've been in because they were sick of being asked to do X when they wanted to do Y (and that includes rerolling mains for a new role).
    If what people are asked to do includes rerolling mains for a new role, then how is restricting roles on classes actually going to solve this person's problem?

    Moreover, how is adding new roles to classes going to make things worse? If anything, it would make things better, because now instead of being forced to choose between rerolling mains for a new role and having to leave and find a new guild, he now has a third option: play the new role while still being able to stay on his current main.

    ------------------------------------------------

    I have heard some arguments about whether lock tanking is actually good for the game, and I've actually considered a lot of them and changed some of my viewpoints on them. It saddens me, then, that the fallback here seems this flimsy argument based on players who "don't want to be forced to tank" and are afraid that adding more ability to a class means they are "forced to become the new main tank."

    There are two kinds of people who like to only play DPS: Those who are willing to switch to tank/heals for a night maybe, but don't want that to be their main role, and those who refuse to tank/heal whatsoever point-blank.

    For the former, they apply based on their role, and will understand if they have to switch for a night. The guild understands that they are willing to do so but will find a new guild if they are forced to permanently switch roles.

    For the latter, I'm going to be frank. If you never tank/heal whatsoever, you probably don't have the bars for it, you probably don't have the UI/addons for it, and you probably don't know how to tank/heal (as in what to look for and stuff). The guild probably knows this, and even if its "this druid switches to heal/tank or we don't raid," there's no point in waiting for 30+ min for said person to unwillingly set up bars, download addons, and learn to heal/tank for a raid that would fall apart within an hour anyway.

    ------------------------------------------------

    Also this isn't specific to warlock tanking.

    Aversion to being "forced" to use an optional spec isn't a good reason for not including said spec. Being afraid that as a paladin, you'll be "forced" to ranged DPS is a stupid reason not to implement a holy DPS spec. Being afraid that as a rogue, you'll be "forced" to forgo your three melee specs for one ranged spec is a stupid reason not to implement a ranged rogue spec.

    Hell, being afraid to play melee is a stupid reason not to play an elemental/restoration shaman. Being afraid to heal is a stupid reason for a MDPS player to forgo enhancement.

    Even for the specs I mentioned above, there might be good reasons not to put the 4th specs in (the main one I can think of is "not needed" or "won't make the game better). But fear of being forced to play an optional spec is definitely not one of them.
    Last edited by nightfalls; 2013-02-09 at 03:28 PM.

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by kalathoran View Post
    i want to start off with a disclaimer that i dont believe 'blues' should respond to this. i dont believe this should be a petition for wow devs. i dont believe this should be taken so seriously someone needs to rage. just a 'what if and how would you go about it'

    that being said, i believe if a lock were to tank it would be either a mechanic that has shared hp w/ the minion or the lock themselves would be tanking in metamorphasis. i think the meta version would be similar to a dk in that it would rely on self heals, where as the minion version would be based on the locks stats (and there would need to be some form of conversion for stats like int = dodge on the minion, etc, etc.


    any ideas or am i drinking to much?
    Warlocks CAN tank, just not anything past regular dungeons. The mechanics provide a lot of threat generation, damage reduction, and absorption, similar to DK or paladin tanking, the only thing left for warlocks is scaling that will allow them to take big hits that come from raids.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jevlin
    Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

    Every time you have a question that begins with "Why?" that is about what other people prefer to do with their own goddamn time, come back here, and reread the first row of this post. That will ALWAYS be the answer to your question. Have a nice day.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by voidspark View Post
    Then they obviously didn't belong in that guild, if the guild was unwilling to accept the role that a player applied to do. So there's nothing wrong with them apping out, whichever class they play.
    That's fine for the asocial guild hopper. Less cool for the more sociable types an MMO is geared toward. Again, choosing a class because it's a pure isn't something someone would come to a decision to lightly over; not least because it restricts them already heavily in what classes they can choose. If they want to play melee, they play Rogue: That's not choice.

    If what people are asked to do includes rerolling mains for a new role, then how is restricting roles on classes actually going to solve this person's problem?
    Moreover, how is adding new roles to classes going to make things worse? If anything, it would make things better, because now instead of being forced to choose between rerolling mains for a new role and having to leave and find a new guild, he now has a third option: play the new role while still being able to stay on his current main.
    I'm talking about players who wanted to reroll, not being asked to reroll. Even wanting to reroll to a different class for the same role (and being denied because it would take too long to re-gear and/or imbalance the raid setup).

    I have heard some arguments about whether lock tanking is actually good for the game, and I've actually considered a lot of them and changed some of my viewpoints on them. It saddens me, then, that the fallback here seems this flimsy argument based on players who "don't want to be forced to tank" and are afraid that adding more ability to a class means they are "forced to become the new main tank."
    It's the one that gets focused on because it's seen as a purely "selfish" decision and it is absolutely intractable so becomes a sticking point. I don't think it is the best reason, but it is totally a valid one. The best reason I feel is that it would be better just to make a new class for it, because it wouldn't be hamstrung by existing design contraints within the existing class models. Yet no one seems to want to discuss that.

    There are two kinds of people who like to only play DPS: Those who are willing to switch to tank/heals for a night maybe, but don't want that to be their main role, and those who refuse to tank/heal whatsoever point-blank.

    For the former, they apply based on their role, and will understand if they have to switch for a night. The guild understands that they are willing to do so but will find a new guild if they are forced to permanently switch roles.

    For the latter, I'm going to be frank. If you never tank/heal whatsoever, you probably don't have the bars for it, you probably don't have the UI/addons for it, and you probably don't know how to tank/heal (as in what to look for and stuff). The guild probably knows this, and even if its "this druid switches to heal/tank or we don't raid," there's no point in waiting for 30+ min for said person to unwillingly set up bars, download addons, and learn to heal/tank for a raid that would fall apart within an hour anyway.
    The problem is that guild structures simply aren't that rigid. Over time people come and go, and someone who applied to only ever DPS 18 months ago might find one day a MT leaves; a replacement is hard to find and over the coming weeks raids get cancelled as a result. They say 'Okay, I'll get a tank set so we can raid', then over the following weeks they just get fed up of it when they've become relied upon and the search effectively stopped.

    Also this isn't specific to warlock tanking.

    Aversion to being "forced" to use an optional spec isn't a good reason for not including said spec. Being afraid that as a paladin, you'll be "forced" to ranged DPS is a stupid reason not to implement a holy DPS spec. Being afraid that as a rogue, you'll be "forced" to forgo your three melee specs for one ranged spec is a stupid reason not to implement a ranged rogue spec.

    Hell, being afraid to play melee is a stupid reason not to play an elemental/restoration shaman. Being afraid to heal is a stupid reason for a MDPS player to forgo enhancement.

    Even for the specs I mentioned above, there might be good reasons not to put the 4th specs in (the main one I can think of is "not needed" or "won't make the game better). But fear of being forced to play an optional spec is definitely not one of them.
    Well I've already said, it's not needed because tank numbers are self regulating at all levels. Whether it makes the game better is subjective, but I happen to think in this specific case, there's a better way to add a DH tanking spec than to add it to Warlocks. I certainly don't think it would make the game better if every class was capable of filling every role, because it's a very effective means of avoiding homogenisation which is already a very big concern (Aff Vs SPriest for example).

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    The best reason I feel is that it would be better just to make a new class for it, because it wouldn't be hamstrung by existing design contraints within the existing class models. Yet no one seems to want to discuss that.
    Hey, I'm up for discussing it, God knows I'm on the edge of saving my "Why a new class is better than a 4th DH spec" posts into a notepad file I'm so sick of feeling the need to post it, alas, I doubt there'd be much to discuss since we'd be in agreement.

    I will mention that, while I consider that the main problem, I do think being asked to tank is a problem - I'm not talking about "when the tank spec is opened up your guild is going to bully you into MTing", that's purely hyperbole. What WILL happen is, warlock tanks will end up being incredibly strong on some fights, because trying to fit the tank spec into the existing warlock model brings pretty huge ramifications to balance, and on THAT fight - there will be guilds that ask if you will tank it, just like there are guilds that would ask you to go demonology / affliction for some fights.

    But - that just gets expanded on to the point people are calling it the "main argument point", when it's not - it's being made that because people are getting hung up on it. It's not the main point, it's just what people seem to try to argue against most.
    Last edited by Nagassh; 2013-02-09 at 04:27 PM.

  5. #85
    Stood in the Fire Queen Ultima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Ireland, home of the Potato, Whisky, Drunks and Drunk Fighting Tournaments
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by voidspark View Post
    Even for the specs I mentioned above, there might be good reasons not to put the 4th specs in (the main one I can think of is "not needed" or "won't make the game better). But fear of being forced to play an optional spec is definitely not one of them.
    I really must ask your logic on this. It's sounding, like to me, as if you're saying "Cars should have motorbikes built into them and anyone who doesn't want them is just scared of motorbikes". If you want some "non-forced" reasons:

    1) It's what we have: Warlocks are meant to be Pure DPS characters, with limited off-tanking with a glyph (as much as an arms warrior or enh shaman outting on a 1h shield and tank stance) being given as a bonus. Players are already used to that, and even removing the "I might be forced to do it" aspect, having your class roles change entirely overnight is verry jarring for some people.

    2) It would either change an entire spec (leaving those who enjoy said spec in the cold) or require a 4th spec. As I said before, Warlocks have gotten enough shiny things in this expansion compared to, say, Shaman or Rogues, that adding an entirely new spec for the first time in the game (again, Druids are not a valid point of comparison since they already had both roles in one spec and have been accepted as both officially since Vanilla) to a class, I can see the complaints. And personally, I do think that sticking a new spec onto Warlocks would be a bad thing

    3) And perhaps the most jarring for me: There already exists options for characters that want to ranged DPS and tank in the form of Druids. The option already exists in Warcraft, and complaining that people don't want it on another class isn't fair because the option already exists. And I know what you're going to say: That rolling a new class requires time and effort. Well yes. Naturally. It's a game. It requires you to do things if you want to do certain things. I find irony in the fact that some people are asking for Warlock Tanks because rolling a new tank is too much effort, and yet are doing it for raiding in a game where people grind dalies for coins for a chance at an extra gear drop. There's a great disparity between the lack of willingness to level, yet willingness to be part of the most organised and effort filled part of the game.

    4) For your argument that those who would be forced into tanking would join a new guild, I would agree if mobility between guilds was a free process. But often there's so many factors (friends, lack of other guilds, wishing not to be sidelined into an off-team directly from a raid team) meaning that that mobility can often be hampered. It's like, say there are 1000 people unemployed, and jobs for 1000 bakers. In theory, they could fill those jobs and move into them without a problem, where in reality there will always be some baker jobs left unfilled because of tertiary, personal challenges to mobility. By the rules of probability, there has to be some warlocks out there that will be forced to tank and can't leave, maybe only one, maybe fifty, maybe a thousand, we don't know.

    5) I think you're underestimating the change for the class. We'd be moving out of a niche role and into the wild blue yonder. Guildmasters would have to re-evaluate the potential of their Warlocks (and that's assuming the tanking class is good compared to the other 5 classes). Meanwhile, those who choose the tanking Spec who are currently 90 will have all of 5 levels to their name before endgame, which IMO is an insufficent amount of time to be aware of the mechanics. Yes, Paladins can level entirely as Ret and never play Prot until 90, but they have the option to switch and have the benefit, if changing, of guides written by those who have experience with the tanks (as I am much indebted to). Warlock tanks in the first days would be slippery since no one would know how to play them (save those on an everchanging PTR/Beta, and that would be a much smaller amount than the overall population). Maybe I'm overstating something that would only be around for a few months, but this is still part my reasoning that the next new tanking spec should be given to the next class, since they could do SO much more with aesthetic, playstyle, resource, cooldowns, and abilities than could be tacked onto Warlocks.

    6) You call out "fear" of being called to tank. I sincerely doubt it's fear that's driving this. I personally have a want to keep Warlocks as DPS because of the fact that a) Alternatives exist: If I want to tank I'll do it on a Paladin, DK, Druid, Warrior or maybe Monk, b ) the specs are already well defined and the shared abilities lack any sort of utility that tanks need, c) I haven't yet seen any Warlock tank idea that synergises with Warlocks, rather than being a copy-paste of other tanking specs and given to warlocks, Jtree was the first to mention drain tanking and pets, and I'm not even sure if things like Life Drain could exist for a tanking spec. Which leads to 7

    7) A tanking spec addition to Warlocks would require an overhaul across specs. Drain Life, healthstone, Tier 15, Tier 30 and Blood Fear within PvP, Unbound Will, Unending Resolve, ARCHINMOND'S VENGENCE let alone T90, and even the effect of the Grimoires all these things and more would have to be adapted, contained, changed and balanced for a tanking spec, and since these are cross-the-board items, all Warlock specs will be affected. A tanking spec isn't just "Ah, sure, Warlocks will be the same, and we'll just add this here spec and nothing will change". Tanking specs must be integrated and balanced with all class-wide abilities. So many Warlock abilities and effects will have to be changed, the entire class will be effected, and honestly I don't see why we should accept it.

  6. #86
    Scarab Lord nightfalls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    4,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    I really must ask your logic on this. It's sounding, like to me, as if you're saying "Cars should have motorbikes built into them and anyone who doesn't want them is just scared of motorbikes".
    I'm not saying this. It's others who are simply scared of motorbikes, and I'm pointing that out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    And perhaps the most jarring for me: There already exists options for characters that want to ranged DPS and tank in the form of Druids.
    And you realize that this is the only option. News flash: No other combination of two roles has only one class option (any other combination of tank, healer, ranged, or melee). What if you didn't like either Guardian or Balance? Then who's the one "forced" into stuff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    For your argument that those who would be forced into tanking would join a new guild, I would agree if mobility between guilds was a free process... By the rules of probability, there has to be some warlocks out there that will be forced to tank and can't leave, maybe only one, maybe fifty, maybe a thousand, we don't know.
    Let me explain: Guilds have expectations from their members - such as, you'll do this role at this level. Members, meanwhile, have expectations from their guilds - such as, they will be brought in reasonably often for this role, on progression fights. Any time there is some deviation between the two, the player has two choices: They can work things out (which may include compromising), or they can leave their guild.

    If a guild needed a tank but didn't need a range, said player was not "forced" to switch to tanking from ranged, he chose to compromise so he could stay in his current guild while still fulfilling a needed role, rather than find another guild that did need the range.

    TL/DR: You're not entitled to your guild.

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    I think you're underestimating the change for the class. We'd be moving out of a niche role and into the wild blue yonder.
    I disagree that the class is so "niche" to begin with, but if your point is true, I think niche roles are for specs - if even that - and definitely not for classes. If the entire warlock class is in a such niche role only, they better be bringing on wild blue yonder.

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    Guildmasters would have to re-evaluate the potential of their Warlocks (and that's assuming the tanking class is good compared to the other 5 classes). Meanwhile, those who choose the tanking Spec who are currently 90 will have all of 5 levels to their name before endgame, which IMO is an insufficent amount of time to be aware of the mechanics....
    There are currently Dark Apotheosis guides, and that wasn't even announced but rather data-mined, and it isn't even a real tank spec. Obviously no one (serious, that is) is asking for this in 5.3, but rather in 6.0, and there will be plenty of time for re-rollers and players to adjust.

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    You call out "fear" of being called to tank. I sincerely doubt it's fear that's driving this. I personally have a want to keep Warlocks as DPS because of the fact that a) Alternatives exist: If I want to tank I'll do it on a Paladin, DK, Druid, Warrior or maybe Monk, b) the specs are already well defined and the shared abilities lack any sort of utility that tanks need.
    Said alternatives of yours are still there, nobody is saying you can't *only* DPS on your warlock, *only* heal on your paladin, and *only* tank on your druid, because those are the specs you like. [edit] Oh, and I don't get why you mention "keeping" warlocks as DPS. As I mentioned with my "shields replacing swords" comment, nobody is suggesting removing warlock DPS as an option

    And go look on the "utility" on tank classes, there's a lot of stuff that's rarely (if ever) used as a tank.

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen Ultima View Post
    A tanking spec addition to Warlocks would require an overhaul across specs. Drain Life, healthstone, Tier 15, Tier 30 and Blood Fear within PvP, Unbound Will, Unending Resolve, ARCHINMOND'S VENGENCE let alone T90, and even the effect of the Grimoires all these things and more would have to be adapted, contained, changed and balanced for a tanking spec...
    1) Such a change would have to happen on an expansion, meaning said things will be changed anyway. I guarantee some of those talents will be baseline, some will be removed, perhaps even the talent system might undergo another minor (Cataclysm-style) or major (MOP-style) overhaul.

    2) You act like gutting and replacing Tier 4 and Tier 6 talents is such a tragedy, when most if not all warlocks agree that currently, they are absolute abortions of talent rows.
    Last edited by nightfalls; 2013-02-09 at 07:38 PM.

  7. #87
    Next expansion 4th tree, tank spec

    Shamans + Locks viable tank specs !!!!

  8. #88
    PVE might start being engaging for me again. I did some PuG runs of all the normal modes and the DPS just have it easy. The tanks and healers generally have to do the same dance as the DPS while being more aware and responsive of raid damage and mechanics. It feels like responsibilities of DPS this tier compared to the other rolls is far too little this tier. I have enough time to look around and see what kind of things the tanks and healers have to deal with and I just facepalm when I see a DPS complain that this tier is hard.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by nekobaka View Post
    PVE might start being engaging for me again. I did some PuG runs of all the normal modes and the DPS just have it easy. The tanks and healers generally have to do the same dance as the DPS while being more aware and responsive of raid damage and mechanics. It feels like responsibilities of DPS this tier compared to the other rolls is far too little this tier. I have enough time to look around and see what kind of things the tanks and healers have to deal with and I just facepalm when I see a DPS complain that this tier is hard.
    As with all roles, there's good and bad players. A bad dpser will not wipe you on normal modes so long as you have the dps to make it through the encounter anyway. The same can be said for tanks and healers on all normal fights. There's no need for minmaxing or skillcapping for normal modes, which is why you're seeing DPSing as such an easy job. But there's a huge difference between a good dpser and a semi good dpser.
    Give identical gear to 100 random players and you'll find a 70k dps difference between the best and the worst, without even considering things such as defensive cooldowns and not standing in the fire / not swapping to adds and what not. Compare that to taunting and spamming shield barrier or mouseovering the raid spamming rejuvenation and the same rules apply. Some people do it better.
    The buttom line is, any role can slack so long as somebody else picks up said slack. If you have a tank doing 300k dps on every boss, then yeah, dpsing is easy, because you really don't even have to.

  10. #90
    I can't choose to play a pure healer.
    I can't choose to play a pure tank.
    Why does DPS get to choose a pure DPS?

    If you have trouble with people pressuring you to play a spec you do not like, then put a smile on your face and be completely agreeable. Tell them you will do your best! Proceed to suck at it so bad they never ask you to do that again. Works like a charm with only a fraction of the social stigma.

  11. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    I can't choose to play a pure healer.
    I can't choose to play a pure tank.
    Why does DPS get to choose a pure DPS?

    Because every class needs to be able to deal damage, it's essential for both questing and due to raid design often resulting in you dropping a tank or a healer, there are few to zero fights where you drop a dps for an extra healer or tank.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    If you have trouble with people pressuring you to play a spec you do not like, then put a smile on your face and be completely agreeable. Tell them you will do your best! Proceed to suck at it so bad they never ask you to do that again. Works like a charm with only a fraction of the social stigma.
    Of you could go and play a class that can tank if you want to tank, just a thought.

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    Of you could go and play a class that can tank if you want to tank, just a thought.
    show me a tank class with the demon motif and I'll gladly reroll
    Warlorcs of Draenorc made me quit. You can't have my stuff.

  13. #93
    Stood in the Fire Confucius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    425
    [/COLOR]
    Quote Originally Posted by checking facts View Post
    show me a tank class with the demon motif and I'll gladly reroll
    dk's maybe? They do summon crap
    Last edited by Confucius; 2013-02-10 at 12:35 PM.

  14. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Confucius View Post
    [/COLOR]

    dk's maybe? They do summon crap
    zombie =/= demon
    Warlorcs of Draenorc made me quit. You can't have my stuff.

  15. #95
    Titan Wildtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    12,241
    What if locks could tank.......
    The answer is: Then we'd have a step back in the evolution of the game and it's classes. Locks have been very well capable to tank a large amount of encounters during TBC, and early WotLK. Lock tank on horsemen in Naxx.. Quite often used.
    Locks like hunters had tanking abilities which in part still exist. Just not to the full range like a real class does.
    Both can still tank some stuff, which comes at a price of having to sacrifice amounts of their dps. Done right, you control your pet more actively, and that means you don't dps that much anymore.
    I've been doing 5 man heroics with lock tank quite frequently in TBC while they were still current content. They've been used for off tank purpose as well.

    I am not a friend of making them specialized tanks. We and the game don't need that.

  16. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    Because every class needs to be able to deal damage, it's essential for both questing and due to raid design often resulting in you dropping a tank or a healer, there are few to zero fights where you drop a dps for an extra healer or tank.
    Every class can already deal damage, enough to get through any quest. There are plenty of fights where you drop a DPS for an extra healer in 10 man. Gara'jal, Elegon, Wind Lord, Empress, and Tsulong spring to mind immediately.
    Of you could go and play a class that can tank if you want to tank, just a thought.
    This reply has nothing to do with my quote. What did you mean to say?

  17. #97
    Brewmaster Skayth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Backwards Country
    Posts
    1,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    Because every class needs to be able to deal damage, it's essential for both questing and due to raid design often resulting in you dropping a tank or a healer, there are few to zero fights where you drop a dps for an extra healer or tank.


    Of you could go and play a class that can tank if you want to tank, just a thought.
    1. Have you used a dk tank? pally tank? War tank? Druid tank? because by your post, it seems pretty clear you havent. They are very very good damage dealing beasts that just dont die, as you aoe down 10 mobs (min) at once. Disc priest and their atonement healing is fracking amazing dps, fistweaver monks, both restos thunder/wrath spam. You see what I am doing here? Who cares if its a little bit slower than a dps, they will kill tons of mobs and be at full health before the last one even dies. That is your questing. In a raid environment? Really? It is because they are hybrids that blizz put that in there. If there were no hybrids, then there wouldnt be an encounter where you would change your spec.

    2. I have all 5 tanks, like all their playstyles. Yet, they simply are alts, thats it. If there was a demon wielding badass tank, I would also go to that class. But since there are no other demon classes in game sorta stuck with this one, waiting for the spec to be introduced, which i have been waiting for since van/bc early days. (if you do not know what I am talking about, go look up sl/sl) With that, we were drain tanking beasts, and never died as we tanked. (even got all the pvp gear because of the higher armor ratings, and stam gems to make myself a tanking god)

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    Every class can already deal damage, enough to get through any quest.
    Now? Yes, the question was why are there pure dps but no pure healers - that's your answer. Classes were made back in classic - not MOP, when tanks and healers kinda couldn't do squat to mobs - you needed a damage dealing spec, because you need to deal damage to kill things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    There are plenty of fights where you drop a DPS for an extra healer in 10 man. Gara'jal, Elegon, Wind Lord, Empress, and Tsulong spring to mind immediately.
    3 healing fights isn't what I'd consider dropping a dps, 2 healing fight is dropping a healer. 4 healing Empress is literally the only example I can think of where you sub a dps for a healer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    This reply has nothing to do with my quote. What did you mean to say?
    Seems like a more reasonable thing to do than being a dick to your guild by tanking badly.

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfen View Post
    1. Have you used a dk tank? pally tank? War tank? Druid tank? because by your post, it seems pretty clear you havent. They are very very good damage dealing beasts that just dont die, as you aoe down 10 mobs (min) at once. Disc priest and their atonement healing is fracking amazing dps, fistweaver monks, both restos thunder/wrath spam.

    You see what I am doing here?
    Replying to an answer, without reading what the answer was answering apparently. See above.


    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    2. I have all 5 tanks, like all their playstyles. Yet, they simply are alts, thats it. If there was a demon wielding badass tank, I would also go to that class. But since there are no other demon classes in game sorta stuck with this one, waiting for the spec to be introduced, which i have been waiting for since van/bc early days.
    Quote Originally Posted by checking facts View Post
    show me a tank class with the demon motif and I'll gladly reroll
    B-but that's not how things work.

    You don't play an FPS and say "hey, I want to fight in close combat, but I like the way sniper rifles look - that means sniper rifles should get a shotgun attached to them".

    You can't simply say "hey I like healing but none of the healers use necromantic powers, so I'm stuck playing a deathknight until they add it".

    Your argument falls down to being self entitled and stubborn. There are some arguments for a warlock tanking spec, but this one I struggle considering even remotely valid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iry View Post
    (if you do not know what I am talking about, go look up sl/sl) With that, we were drain tanking beasts, and never died as we tanked. (even got all the pvp gear because of the higher armor ratings, and stam gems to make myself a tanking god)
    SL:SL was a godly pvp spec, it was not a tank spec.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildtree View Post
    What if locks could tank.......
    The answer is: Then we'd have a step back in the evolution of the game and it's classes. Locks have been very well capable to tank a large amount of encounters during TBC, and early WotLK. Lock tank on horsemen in Naxx.. Quite often used.
    And mages tanked on Cho'gall. I wouldn't call the handful of fights we "tanked" in resistance gear as "Quite often", it was a novelty. Fun and memorable, but a novelty.

  19. #99
    Brewmaster Skayth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Backwards Country
    Posts
    1,275
    Nagassh. You dont seem to understand what i spoke. If they were pure tanks/pure heals, I showed you a couple of examples of healers/tanks able to damage to quest/raid to the point they could be feasible. Yet, they are all hybrids.

    You are right, you do not play a fps with sniper rifles, yet people do it. People go through entire games with the sniper rifle. But you are not supposed to. Now onto RPGs, that we all play, oh. look. skyrim. I love being a sneaky bow wielder that conjures twin daedra, then instantly go into full daedric plate duel wielding axes as I slaughter more and shout. Oh, I love running backwards shooting bandits in head with a bow and arrow,either barely outta reach, or just standing there and shooting them, LoLing as there roll over dead.
    ^---- see what I did there? i took that argument and tossed it.

    You can bubble people as a dk, with Death Coil (unless they got rid of that glyph)

    Sl:Sl, you could tank with it. Wasnt meant to be done, and nobody in there right minds would let you do it, but you do it. Tanking heroics cause of bad tanks made them kick the tank at times.

  20. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    Now? Yes, the question was why are there pure dps but no pure healers - that's your answer. Classes were made back in classic - not MOP, when tanks and healers kinda couldn't do squat to mobs - you needed a damage dealing spec, because you need to deal damage to kill things.
    Explaining why there are no pure tanks or pure healers should not qualify as an argument for why pure DPS should continue to exist. I appreciate the history lesson, but I'm talking about making progressive changes for the future.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    3 healing fights isn't what I'd consider dropping a dps, 2 healing fight is dropping a healer. 4 healing Empress is literally the only example I can think of where you sub a dps for a healer.
    3 healing those fights? We one heal most fights and only bring in a second healer for particularly hard fights like the ones I mentioned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    Seems like a more reasonable thing to do than being a dick to your guild by tanking badly.
    The point is that they do not know you are being a dick. They think you are trying your very best.

    You also seem to have misquoted me on a large number of issues. Please apologize and fix your quotes.

Posting Permissions

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