Nerf warlock alrdy.

[purebalance]

Shadow priests and warlocks both have a ton of cc, defenses, and damage. They are simply far more powerful than a lot of other classes right now.

Warlocks have no more cc and defenses than any other class. I'm sorry, but I'd like to see an itemized proof of this unfounded claim by you. I really would.

[Phoenexis]

Warlocks have no more cc and defenses than any other class. I'm sorry, but I'd like to see an itemized proof of this unfounded claim by you. I really would.

---------- Post added 2012-11-03 at 07:19 PM ----------

COMPARISON OF CC AND SURVIVABILITY BETWEEN ALL CASTER CLASSES

DISCLAIMER: This is a series of grids meant to compare all caster classes in the following categories: CC, gap-openers, passive/short CD defense and active defensive CDs. A description of each ability is present, along with a count of each classes' number of spells that fall into the mentioned categories, while taking into consideration glyphs, specs and talents.
NOT ALL ABILITIES ARE LISTED. The purpose of these grids are to compare the classes in a 3v3 competitive scenario. Therefore, only abilities that are considered viable in a 3v3 situation are present. Not only are these abilities not listed, but they are also removed from any variable and CD counting average since they will not be chosen in the first place.
For example: Tier 1 of the warlock talents contain Dark Regeneration, Soul Leech, and Harvest Life. The last two are not considered viable for 3v3, therefor, the warlock doesn't really make a choice between the 3 talents, because Dark Regeneration will always be the winner. As a result, in my sum of "at the cost of x possible utility spells", I will not count Soul Leech nor Harvest Life.

The data presented is not accurate seeing as I neither play all of these classes competitively nor do I have a very objective view of the game (as you've noticed if you've seen my posts). However, the information present within this post should be sufficient for fair comparison.

Comparison is shown in number, and NOT in value of abilities. Posters may therefor judge each ability's value so that I can proceed with a grid containing each spell's worth.

I'd really appreciate it if you'd focus on comparison instead of nit-picking typos and small menial errors that wouldn't make much of a difference. Thanks for taking the time to read!


Glossary:

*=Talent tier related
*2= different Talent tier related
*3=another different Talent tier related
^=Spec related
#=Pet related

■=Categories
■=Important averages/summaries

■=Warlock
■=Mage
■=Druid
■=Priest
■=Shaman

Not everything is said explicitly, you will have to read through the lines for some sums and counts.
For example, when listing the number of passive defensive abilities a warlock has and the cost of them, a maximum of 6 can be obtained at the cost of 3 possible utility spells. This means that through talent, glyph, spec and/or pet choice, the warlock may have 6 different passive or short CD defensive abilities. In this case, a Destro or Demo warlock with Ember Tap/DA, using an imp for Cauterize Master and Singe Magic, along with Soul Link, Curse of Enfeeblement, Twilight Ward and Fel Armor is the maximum achievable. In order to have all of these, the warlock must give up on 1 CC (Spell-lock, whiplash, disarm or axe toss), 1 active defensive ability (Soul Link instead of Sac. Pact/Dark Bargain) and Burning Embers/Demonic Fury [due to switching mid combat and losing it all]). As a result, I would list the following:Maximum amount of passive defense: 6 (at the cost of 3 possible utility spells) - 7 for Demo and Destro in exchange of major resource (Ember Tap, DA)

You can view the grids directly through this post, or view the following link (which has an easier navigation): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwMe...I3Q3p4d2M/edit




---------- Post added 2012-09-15 at 01:26 PM ----------

Comparison of CC abilities:




---------- Post added 2012-09-15 at 01:27 PM ----------

Comparison of Gap-openers:




---------- Post added 2012-09-15 at 01:28 PM ----------

Comparison of Passive survivability/Short defensive CDs:




---------- Post added 2012-09-15 at 01:28 PM ----------

Comparison of Active Defensive CDs:




---------- Post added 2012-09-15 at 01:29 PM ----------

All in all Comparison:


---------- Post added 2012-11-03 at 07:21 PM ----------

See unlike most people, we've actually done our research and argumentation. Let's put it this way: When you have over 1000 pages of discussions regarding Warlocks in MoP, something is wrong. Unless you'd like to say that warlocks have a more dedicated playerbase than any other class... Although I can assure you that we're the second least played class in the game (monks excluded), so numbers aren't doing us any good.

[Gangresnake]

Incoming great wall of text that will show how clueless you are.

The best part is when I scroll down, See that you're comparing casted CC and instant CC, talented CC with baseline CC and assuming that several defensive CD are better than one iceblock

So yeah, that was clueless.

[Phoenexis]

The best part is when I scroll down, See that you're comparing casted CC and instant CC, talented CC with baseline CC and assuming that several defensive CD are better than one iceblock

So yeah, that was clueless.

Too bad you didn't take the time to read the disclaimer...

[Gangresnake]

Too bad you didn't take the time to read the disclaimer...

I did. Graph is still clueless

Also, back on topic, Destruction is litteraly the worst arena spec and I cant help but think that one would have to be pretty bad to complain about Chaos bolt doing big numbers

[Phoenexis]

Let's be honest here, I just posted this thing. You couldn't have possibly read everything. You just went "oh this is a big wall of text", scrolled down, saw "All in all", and started judging. I also never compared the "quality" of each ability, that's up to you to know (something very obvious), hence the disclaimer and glossary, which you couldn't have read unless you didn't understand what was written.

[Kashii]

Let's be honest here, I just posted this thing. You couldn't have possibly read everything. You jsut went "oh this is a big wall of text", scrolled down, saw "All in all", and started judging.

You don't have to read the entire thing to know it is really a pointless post unless it is accompanied by a qualitative analysis.

It is meaningless to say class A has 10 abilities and class B has 12 abilities unless you compare the effectiveness of those abilities. Saying, for example, that a self heal with a CD is anywhere close to equivalent to an on demand self heal (hybrids) is idiotic.

[Gangresnake]

2 min is plenty enough to read the disclaimer, scroll down, see talented/Spec dependant CC compared to baseline CC, Casted CC compared to instant CC, and conclude that this graph isnt relevant

[Phoenexis]

You don't have to read the entire thing to know it is really a pointless post unless it is accompanied by a qualitative analysis.

It is meaningless to say class A has 10 abilities and class B has 12 abilities unless you compare the effectiveness of those abilities. Saying, for example, that a self heal with a CD is anywhere close to equivalent to an on demand self heal (hybrids) is idiotic.

Look, I'm honestly not going to post the 30 pages of discussions that we've previously had regarding the subject. I'm just providing some proof to show who's right and who's basing thoughts on nothing. If you want, this is an "index" that will make it easier for you to realize who has it better.

[rhorle]

The data presented is not accurate...

I think that part of the points out the merit of the entire post. If you are going to make a point and make multiple posts to form one long post at least make sure that you yourself consider the information Accurate. Otherwise it ruins the entire point you are trying to make. Also a simple link to the thread would have sufficed instead of copying and pasting the information.

When you have over 1000 pages of discussions regarding Warlocks in MoP, something is wrong.

Like the number of posts your account has made the pages of a thread are meaningless for actual merit. Just because something is discussed a lot or has a lot of pages doesn't make it automatically wrong. Something can be wrong with 1 post or with 99 billion. It is the merit and accuracy of information that determines if something is wrong not how long you've discussed it.

[Lora]

Absolutely compelling argument except for the fact that it takes a long time for them to be able to chaos bolt and if you fail to interupt/silence/cc like you should be then you deserve it. Warlocks are fine, nerf second wind already.

[Phoenexis]

2 min is plenty enough to read the disclaimer, scroll down, see talented/Spec dependant CC compared to baseline CC, Casted CC compared to instant CC, and conclude that this graph isnt relevant

Thing is, you claim that I'm assuming that some cds are better than ice block, so I'd guess you thought that the numbers were there to give a rating. However they are not, and that's explained in the glossary, which you couldn't have read, unless you didn't understand.

[Reyzzz]

I did. Graph is still clueless

Also, back on topic, Destruction is litteraly the worst arena spec and I cant help but think that one would have to be pretty bad to complain about Chaos bolt doing big numbers

Dafuq? last time I faced destro in arena I took 280k in 2 globals with 59% resi (50k conflag +172k chaos bolt + 50k conflag)

[Phoenexis]

I think that part of the points out the merit of the entire post. If you are going to make a point and make multiple posts to form one long post at least make sure that you yourself consider the information Accurate. Otherwise it ruins the entire point you are trying to make. Also a simple link to the thread would have sufficed instead of copying and pasting the information.

The link was there 2 pages ago, but obviously nobody took the time to read it. Also, when I'm saying that it's not accurate, I'm mostly being modest to be honest.

[Gangresnake]

Dafuq? last time I faced destro in arena I took 280k in 2 globals with 59% resi (50k conflag +172k chaos bolt + 50k conflag)

Last time I faced Destro in arena I saw the insanely visible burst effect, CC/Interrupt/Dispel'd him, then won because once the burst is done, its a pure 3v2. Destro dont have any sustained and thus are completely all-in on their cooldown+chaos bolt.

[Phoenexis]

Like the number of posts your account has made the pages of a thread are meaningless for actual merit. Just because something is discussed a lot or has a lot of pages doesn't make it automatically wrong. Something can be wrong with 1 post or with 99 billion. It is the merit and accuracy of information that determines if something is wrong not how long you've discussed it.

Although you've got a very valid point, can you actually say that all these claims are baseless when they've been argued over through debates, even with developers? Sure you're going to find people saying random stuff that won't contribute to anything, but is it the only thing that you're going to find in all those pages?

---------- Post added 2012-11-03 at 07:51 PM ----------

Edit: I had actually quoted the wrong person in the "big" post, this is awkward...

[Hexotic]

lol, a bm hunter is asking for a nerf on another class in pvp, this post made me smile, thx.

[rhorle]

Although you've got a very valid point, can you actually say that all these claims are baseless when they've been argued over through debates, even with developers? Sure you're going to find people saying random stuff that won't contribute to anything, but is it the only thing that you're going to find in all those pages?

So because everyone in the community thinks Onyxia deep breathes more, that means she is? Just because something is believed, discussed, or argued a lot doesn't mean it becomes truth.

[Phoenexis]

So because everyone in the community thinks Onyxia deep breathes more, that means she is? Just because something is believed, discussed, or argued a lot doesn't mean it becomes truth.

Of course not, but when you're basing yourself on real facts, it's not the case. Arguing for the sake of arguing means nothing, and I doubt that the whole playerbase is like that. And I'm pretty sure the problem turned out to be real considering the state of warlocks in MoP.

---------- Post added 2012-11-03 at 07:58 PM ----------

I don't get why you give such vague examples (though true) when the context within this situation is so clear.

[Gangresnake]

I don't get why you give such vague examples (though true) when the context within this situation is so clear.

What exactly is vague in his argument and what exactly is clear withing this situation ?