[Broken] Overpower costing 10 Rage

[Kezotar]

Don't warriors get more rage if they get hit so truly they would have more rage then this video shows?

Yes, 3,4 rage every second That is if you have a 100%UPTIME on the target. Meaning you hit with every white strike. No dodge,parry or miss.

[zorkuus]

silly you for thinking warriors go d-stance to max out out dps we go d stance to reduce damage at the cost or rage/dps.

That's not the real reason, you go def because it's OP and you can pwn. The drawback of def stance was not big enough to offset its pluses.

[Kezotar]

That's not the real reason, you go def because it's OP and you can pwn. The drawback of def stance was not big enough to offset its pluses.

Defensive stance was never OP. People razed down warriors easily with it. And of course a experienced warrior with stance switching did at the end of the scoreboard more damage than the one in defensive stance.

Think of it like this.

2v2
DPS is on you, you're on healer. ( defensive stance )
DPS is on your healer or your DPS, you're on healer ( battle stance )


The second I see I'm being targeted -> Defensive stance. Warriors are squishy.

[loki504]

warrior do less damage in d-stance then in battle stance.we also get less rage,so whats the problem?tell me what stance you want warrior to sit in then?the problem is not d-stance or 2nd wind ect.the probelm is warriors are not easy to kill like we were in cata and people are mad at that.warriors were DESIGNED to give and take a ton of damage "that why we had more Armour and more hitpoints then any other class".warriors are not supposed to be an easy kill,just like f- mages are not an easy kill beacsue of there cc/d's cds.

dks has no restriction on any of there abilities right?they cna sit in blood at the cost of rune power right?so why cant warriors do the same?d stance has been nerfed from 25% to 15%.what more do you want?like i said unerf battle stance an add back in the -% damage reduction,so warriors can just sit in battle stance.or is that wrong also?

dk get increase in rp by 20% 15 less runic power cost for frost strike and they lose reducing the duration of effects that remove control of your character by 20%.
so they lose alot when changing pressence. FAR more then a warrior

[meathead]

That's not the real reason, you go def because it's OP and you can pwn. The drawback of def stance was not big enough to offset its pluses.

d stance had been nerfed down to 15% damage reduction.how the fuck ios that op'ed?d -stance has always been what 10-15% damage reducation,but know you call it op'?ed as an excuse to keep nerfing shit that does not need to be nerfed.

nerf d stance its op'ed,but thats not enough. nerf 2nd wind,nerf fear,nerf shockwave,nerf op,nerf MS.funny how fuckign clueless people are when you list the nerfs and they still say they were justified lmfao.

---------- Post added 2013-01-22 at 04:25 PM ----------

dk get increase in rp by 20% 15 less runic power cost for frost strike and they lose reducing the duration of effects that remove control of your character by 20%.
so they lose alot when changing pressence. FAR more then a warrior

warriors get -15% damage from d stance and thats it.warriors could only wish for "ose reducing the duration of effects that remove control of your character by 20%. "

[Miko]

dk get increase in rp by 20% 15 less runic power cost for frost strike and they lose reducing the duration of effects that remove control of your character by 20%.
so they lose alot when changing pressence. FAR more then a warrior

This is the issue I have. As a warrior I do not want to sit in def stance. I want to be in battle stance when im allowed to pressure, and def stance when shit gets bad. Sitting in def stance 100% of my arena life isnt why I play this class. Also, as it is on live warriors are not dying to cheap shots they are infact, not dying at all becuase no one targets them.

[Raugnaut]

Don't warriors get more rage if they get hit so truly they would have more rage then this video shows?

It was tied to Berserker stance. Berserker stances grants 6 rage per hit, and 1 rage for every 1% health in damage taken. Generally, in pvp, if you take damage, its most likely gonna be burst, meaning you wanna be in D stance.

Berserker stance is more for PvE, where you know the raid damage your gonna take, and can plan accordingly.

[Deleted]

dont forget the SW change. warriors will die in a stun without SW even ticking once.

[Deleted]

dont forget the SW change. warriors will die in a stun without SW even ticking once.

Ehm plate still offers the largest base dmg reduction, so sure you might take more magic dmg, but as this is mainly apparently about rogues....

From what I've read.... honestly... Arms warrior using defensive stance doesnt sit right, sure if you're getting focused and need those extra seconds for the heal to land, but all the time? No.... L2STANCE DANCE.... you know, like warriors used to do? :P

[Kankipappa]

Most people here have totally forgotten Berserker Stance, what is supposed to work as the "when I'm getting slight damage in and I have a healer, I'd better use that stance to give out more damage back" scenario. I've used it on 3v3 games to get a full ragebar, to gain an edge and turn the game around. Realistically though you can't assume to use it against a team that for example has casters like mage with superior CC-toolkit, because it raises warriors awareness/prediction skill level too high, while you get crushed like a paper. The actual problem is that you can't switch stances, or do anything when you're getting CC'd. The Only thing is trinket with 2min cooldown. That's all you have. The game just has too many CC's.

It's always fun that people talk about "but you got spell reflect, just use it to reflect freeze, you got shield wall so you can't die" etc. Somehow warrior always has to be the receiving end and act perfectly and without hesitation to get even against the opponent. Why for example again mages don't have these stances, or the need to change their armors on the fly? All they have to do is slow and aoe-root me on the place to defend.

Most of the "good classes" that won't have this problem is simply because they have something to click when getting in the danger zone. Even hunters got this small godmode button called deterrence, but warriors just got the bad version of it, "die by the sword" what can be stunned or hit from the back to bypass, and doesn't really work on ranged outside from the weak 20% reduction. Sure, most of them only got this "one way out" button but still, that's more than a total of zero. So players just were standing on Def stance for reason. It's the risk what needs to be minimized because we don't have a life saver button, sadly.

Just make the other stances a lot better for most cases, Imho it's the wrong idea to make them all equally bad. Same with second wind, they're making it partly weak on PvP while only giving so minor buffs to other talents on the same tier, that it makes me totally confused.

[meathead]

Ehm plate still offers the largest base dmg reduction, so sure you might take more magic dmg, but as this is mainly apparently about rogues....

From what I've read.... honestly... Arms warrior using defensive stance doesnt sit right, sure if you're getting focused and need those extra seconds for the heal to land, but all the time? No.... L2STANCE DANCE.... you know, like warriors used to do? :P

key word there is USE TO.stances have a global cd now,right?whats the cd 3 secs?yeha makes for great stance dancing right?think before you speak.heres a post from arena junkies.
"SO many idiots. Do they not realize most if not all classes have passive reduction? Spriests shadowform, lock fel armor, rogues can have recoup+feint(still flop over but it's something). Mage has molten armor, dks blood presence, even hunters get 15% with the aspect, you get the point. Most classes at this point have 10-15% damage reduct, and taking away from warriors is retarded.

All they need to fix this is give 15% to battle stance, or take off ragecost of overpower. Nerf to 15% was fine and needed, but you CANNOT play in defensive stance with no rage, and going battlestance is just not an option (warriors have terrible defensive cds)".

[Eranthe]

You should not be sitting in D stance all the time. If you want to do the most damage possible (hint: you do) you are in battle stance until you get focused, then you go D stance. It's not on the GCD, so the only reason you should ever stay in battle stance when you're getting destroyed is if you're cc'ed, which I concede could happen. I don't get why you guys wanna sit in the stance that gives you the least rage possible just because you're too lazy to hit a key that's OFF gcd when you get swapped to.

We want changes that add depth to the warrior playstyle, not sitting in a stance all day every day.

[meathead]

You should not be sitting in D stance all the time. If you want to do the most damage possible (hint: you do) you are in battle stance until you get focused, then you go D stance. It's not on the GCD, so the only reason you should ever stay in battle stance when you're getting destroyed is if you're cc'ed, which I concede could happen. I don't get why you guys wanna sit in the stance that gives you the least rage possible just because you're too lazy to hit a key that's OFF gcd when you get swapped to.

We want changes that add depth to the warrior playstyle, not sitting in a stance all day every day.

read my post above,why is it ok for many classes to have damage reductions but warriors cant?

[Sanguinerd]

"It's retarded"

No sir, you are.

What I intented to say was already said so no need to repeat Kankipappa

Infracted

[Miko]

read my post above,why is it ok for many classes to have damage reductions but warriors cant?

Read your post, DEF stance is just like B pres you spoke off. At the moment it offers 15% less dmg taken, and you suffer from rage while in it. As a DK you sit in
B pres you will also suffer from the same drawback. The thing is that you wish for some reason to have an advantage over other classes. As a warrior I do not wish to be OP to win, I would like to be as close to balanced as possible. Having the ability to sit in DEF stance 100% of the time and suffer no draw back AS A WARRIOR CLASS is not needed and it over powers the class. It allows the warrior never to be pressured off his attack, it teaches bad play and in the end allows the warrior to win arena matches it should have.


Ill say it once again, wanting to sit in DEF stance 100% of the time is wrong. Its wrong play, it makes a warrior a unfun and stupid class to play. Overpowers cost makes def stance something you wont be in all the time, becuase the dmg drawbacks from it.

[Charge me Doctor]

If you sit in def stance you will do less damage. Don't sit in def stance 1000% of time and you will do more damage. Is it hard to understand? You need a def stance ONLY while being focused, and when you are getting focused, you don't think about your damage output.

[WarTV]

Don't warriors get more rage if they get hit so truly they would have more rage then this video shows?

Not anymore this has been changed in MoP.
you only gain rage from ms and auto attacks. unless u are in berserker stance.

----

so many clueless non warriors posting in this topic. keep up the comedy guys just shows how much the qq'rs know about the game.

[meathead]

Read your post, DEF stance is just like B pres you spoke off. At the moment it offers 15% less dmg taken, and you suffer from rage while in it. As a DK you sit in
B pres you will also suffer from the same drawback. The thing is that you wish for some reason to have an advantage over other classes. As a warrior I do not wish to be OP to win, I would like to be as close to balanced as possible. Having the ability to sit in DEF stance 100% of the time and suffer no draw back AS A WARRIOR CLASS is not needed and it over powers the class. It allows the warrior never to be pressured off his attack, it teaches bad play and in the end allows the warrior to win arena matches it should have.


Ill say it once again, wanting to sit in DEF stance 100% of the time is wrong. Its wrong play, it makes a warrior a unfun and stupid class to play. Overpowers cost makes def stance something you wont be in all the time, becuase the dmg drawbacks from it.

and thats were your fucking wrong-for the last dam time and you should know this since you are a "warrior".if you sit in d-stance you get less rage and do less damage then in battle stance.how hard is that to understand?i should be able to sit in what ever stance i want to sit in,if i want to sit in d-stance and do less damage but have better defense so be it.if i want to sit in battle stance and do more damage but lose some defense,so be it.

stop saying there is now draw back for sitting in d-stance,there is =less rage and less damage.try it out your warrior then come back and tell me

[Kaljurei]

read my post above,why is it ok for many classes to have damage reductions but warriors cant?

Actually, I'm not entirely sure but, I think no Melee class has an innate passive damage reduction. Everyone has to use a cooldown to get damage reduction, except Warriors. So I don't see how what you're saying makes sense?

Classes which actually have passive damage reduction are ranged classes. And I guess they would need that since they're ranged?

[Miko]

and thats were your fucking wrong-for the last dam time and you should know this since you are a "warrior".if you sit in d-stance you get less rage and do less damage then in battle stance.how hard is that to understand?i should be able to sit in what ever stance i want to sit in,if i want to sit in d-stance and do less damage but have better defense so be it.if i want to sit in battle stance and do more damage but lose some defense,so be it.

stop saying there is now draw back for sitting in d-stance,there is =less rage and less damage.try it out your warrior then come back and tell me

I think thats what I have been trying to help you to understand, but it seems I have failed. The point I am making, as it stands now you CAN sit in DEF stance 100% of the time. You will do slightly less dps, its not even enough to really make a difference, this is why its a problem, otherwise why would they have added in a 10rage cost for overpower? Players in the ptr are sitting in DEF never going to battle at all. SO why don't try to understand what is being said and explain to me how being in DEF 100% of the time doing maybe 1kless dps at best is some how ok and right.

Just so help you understand, with out a rage cost on overpower there is never a need to EVER remove yourself from DEF stance.