Okay. Blizzard needs to really make Warlock Tanks a 100% reality

[Jessicka]

Why be a pure Dps, when a Druid could do the same damage as you, if not more, pending the nerfs at the time, and you can heal and tank if you really wanted to? The hybrids by this point can do, if not the same dps as a pure, or more. Then they can also do things on the side if they want too, like heal or tank. Pures were left behind in the OLD VANILLA MODEL. Their will never be a new "pure" class added to wow, as it does not fit the new Blizzard logic, where Paladins SHould Just Heal, Druids should just Heal, Warriors should Just TANK. The truth is, Pures are a dated class concept that should be abolished, as one of the last remaining things of vanilla. It would increase the population of the Dying Pure Classes.

On the contrary, with healers and tanks now able to effectively quest and perform in almost all aspects of the game in those specs, the need for a DPS spec has gone. I think it was GC who even said that dual spec "fixes a problem that no longer exists" because of that. And so, I'd contest that the need for a class to have a fully fledged DPS spec is what is truly outdated.

[nightfalls]

I would love that, but I think Locks have had a bit too much recently, wait awhile before flooding the official forums lol, theres still a bunch of other classes that are still 7 or so years old.

Case in point, it says something that I do think locks (again, both mains, alts, and non-players) would benefit from this.

By contrast, I don't think that shaman tanking fits the toolkit of the class as much as warlocks nor do I think it would be as beneficial to the game (as a player who plays a shaman alt). I don't think that paladins "need" a ranged DPS spec despite the fact that I'd get a lot of quality of life from it (as a player who plays a paladin main) as much as warlocks would benefit from a tanking spec considering that paladins already can perform every role in the game. Don't get me wrong, I "want" the spec, but objectively I don't think it's as "needed." This can go on.

I don't think death knights should be healers, plain and simple. Nor, for that matter, do I think warlocks should be healers despite the fact that I would play both specs if introduced. I think a much better "fun" glyph would be one where death knights and warlocks got some hybrid healing ability similar to DPS priests (perhaps a "rogue medic" glyph also). That would be much more useful compared to a "pseudo-tanking" glyph and one which would be much easier to balance. Most of the "hybrid tax" (or better yet, "utility") drama/bullshit is because of hybrid healing in raids. Allowing all classes some hybrid-type heals in raids would actually make DPS balancing a lot less painful. Allowing all classes some simple healing ability increases leveling quality of life a lot more than "Dark Apotheosis" does.

Face it, in today's day and age there's no point to a "pseudo-tanking" glyph, might as well make it a real tanking spec (since it works, just needs balance and a few but not many additional tools), a 4th spec if need be. Benefits extend past lock mains, so "it only benefits the warlock main population" is not an argument against it.

---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 11:50 PM ----------

And so, I'd contest that the need for a class to have a fully fledged DPS spec is what is truly outdated.

And no one would be happy if you took away class abilities to perform roles, and by a similar (not exactly the same logic) adding class abilities to perform roles only tends to better the game.

[Skayth]

On the contrary, with healers and tanks now able to effectively quest and perform in almost all aspects of the game in those specs, the need for a DPS spec has gone. I think it was GC who even said that dual spec "fixes a problem that no longer exists" because of that. And so, I'd contest that the need for a class to have a fully fledged DPS spec is what is truly outdated.

true, at this point, if they added a class without a dps spec, I would not be surprised. But the statement I was trying to make is entirely different. It is the fact that we are the remnants of a dead design, and are showing it in the numbers. I just cannot comprehend why people cling to it. It is like they are the people in denial that Mists of Pandaria was not the expansion. Progression is needed to our design. It is needed in the rogue design more so. But right now, we are a dying breed. Will their be people who play a warlock till the end? yes. I am one of those, for better or for worse. Yet, if us pures dont get a design soon, we will be like the minifernal pets, or my grunty pet, where people say "omg thats so rare whered you get that?" or even the zulian tiger... that i never got =(. We will be that rare thing.

[Queen of Hamsters]

No thank you. I don't like the thought of warlocks doing stuff like that. They're damage dealers, enjoying melting faces of enemies from a distance and sacrificing their demons to save themselves.

[nightfalls]

true, at this point, if they added a class without a dps spec, I would not be surprised. But the statement I was trying to make is entirely different. It is the fact that we are the remnants of a dead design, and are showing it in the numbers. I just cannot comprehend why people cling to it. It is like they are the people in denial that Mists of Pandaria was not the expansion. Progression is needed to our design. It is needed in the rogue design more so. But right now, we are a dying breed. Will their be people who play a warlock till the end? yes. I am one of those, for better or for worse. Yet, if us pures dont get a design soon, we will be like the minifernal pets, or my grunty pet, where people say "omg thats so rare whered you get that?" or even the zulian tiger... that i never got =(. We will be that rare thing.

Wolfen I completely agree as someone who (finally) up and left with a good portion of the reason due to this. It's the reason I haven't even "re-activated" my lock to be an alt in favor of other classes, I just see no reason to have pure alts (again, especially given the time investment required for alts now compared to Cataclysm, so "play for fun" isn't as easy as it sounds) except to farm Junkboxes and be bank alts.

Adding more classes, as if there aren't already enough now, will honestly only compound the problem and it is the last thing the game needs. You're reducing class representation of the existing classes, especially the "low-pop" ones, even more and that's going to lead to smaller and smaller class communities. A big reason often given for why rogues are almost dead as the class is because monks appeared and were able to "steal" a lot of the rogue population due to being so similar, but with modern quality of life and ability to heal and tank.

Do I think a "new" Demon Hunter class will be cool? Hell yeah, I would play it in an instant. It also means I will probably never touch my warlock again. It would be the outdated Blingtron 3000, and who the fuck needs that when the 4000 is out (with working legs... oh, I mean, a tank spec).

[Bigbamboozal]

There is nothing more ironic and laughable about lock tanking than a paladin telling a lock to 'go roll a tank'.
Vanilla paladin would like a word with you...paladin come lately lol
Let the locks tank, promise, you won't get benched, if you aren't a bad player....

[Jessicka]

If pures are dying, why are hunters the second most played class in the game, according to warcraftrealms.com?

[Skayth]

If pures are dying, why are hunters the second most played class in the game, according to warcraftrealms.com?

why are warlocks rogues at the bottom of the list with mages going down in population. Hunters are the most played right now because they are freaking op in arena. or did you forget? Plus their numbers are going down as well.

[nightfalls]

If pures are dying, why are hunters the second most played class in the game, according to warcraftrealms.com?

They've traditionally been strong since Day 1, and they are typically easy to pick up and solo the game with. That said mage population despite usually being good has declined a lot. Hunters also have a lot of problems in raids (low DPS) with a completely dead spec (they are a 2 spec class). Also Hunters are doing really well in PvP... almost too well.

I actually disagree with wolfen's arena argument simply because arena representation is pathetic overall and only going to go down more with their ruinous changes ("crowd chose you buff") unless that is removed from 5.4.

They also take the "pet class" niche over warlocks, easily.

[Jessicka]

Druids, the most hybrid of hybrid have also always been strong, but their numbers have slipped too.

Also, interesting you say arena rep is overall low, yet your arguments are very 'hardcore' raid-centric, which is similarly lowly representative.

[Persada]

We did sorta tank Leo (ssc) and Illidan. Fun times~

[nightfalls]

Also, interesting you say arena rep is overall low, yet your arguments are very 'hardcore' raid-centric, which is similarly lowly representative.

They aren't. The only "hardcore-raid centric" argument I have is the unpopular one that no class should have 3 DPS specs because it makes balance a bitch and tends to lead to "dead" specs both in PvE and PvP. It's also the suggestion I believe is the best "in theory" but the one I acknowledge will be almost impossible to implement in practice.

The quality of life arguments are actually far from "hardcore-raid centric." For starters, most people in hardcore raiding guilds are the least "hurt" by playing a pure. They will steadily have people to queue with when needed, they maintain tons of alts (instant reroll if they want), and they aren't generally queuing much at all except the start of an expansion (usually in their groups).

No, the people hurt most by playing pures with the quality-of-life issues are people who primarily pug trade chat or queue LFD/LFR and those who have limited in-game time to wait forever to find a pug/queue. That is the group I'm really centering around with my arguments, who have high representation, and are arguably the target audience.

[Jessicka]

No, the people hurt most by playing pures with the quality-of-life issues are people who primarily pug trade chat or queue LFD/LFR and those who have limited in-game time to wait forever to find a pug/queue. That is the group I'm really centering around with my arguments, who have high representation, and are arguably the target audience.

I don't believe this is true. It's fair to say most hybrids don't make full use of their tanking capabilities as it is. Previous to loot-specs, healers were always the issue but now it always seems to be a long wait for tanks. I think it's also therefore fair to say that people who play tanks, don't want to play with random groups; I for one never join LFD alone, and am reluctant to tank LFR without either going with another tank or several DPS/Healers for 'support'. I don't honestly know a single tank who would.

I don't see how Warlocks being able to tank themselves will fix that, when the tanks we already have are themselves taking up the option to opt-out in droves. Those few who play Warlock now and would take up tanking would be a drop in the ocean compared to those who reroll from those existing tanks; and there's nothing to say it would improve Warlock representation when you're just as at risk of alienating existing players from the class.

[Deleted]

Being able to change from DPS to Tank DURING A BATTLE and on the fly is a hell of a lot different than making a Lock Tank dependent on Glyph Switching which cannot be changed in combat or in BGs that are active

I didn't mean it like that. They simply don't like having two roles in one spec and having to balance gear, passive talents ect. It is also confusing to players and can be confusing in a pvp environment. Its much easier for the developers and players to have the 2 roles in 2 specs. Blue posts back me up on this.

As for the glyph I think its causing them grief, especially in pvp. I would expect it will be axed next expansion if they continue the no tank policy.

[Kashii]

I voted "Yes, even if demonology dps will be removed in the process" for a couple of reasons

1. The whole "Pure" vs. "Hybrid" division is bad for the game. All pures should have one tree devoted something other than DPS.

2. A fourth specialization isn't necessary and could be detrimental. I'm still hoping for tri-specs since their arguments against them are flimsy. Having one or two classes with 4 rather than 3 specializations muddies the waters.

3. Having a ranged tank would provide some needed freshness to WoW.

Finally, I agree with GC that having a glyph be so powerful that instantly changes the spec from DPS to Tank is bad game design. Could you imagine the glyph's tool tip? There is a lot more to tanking than just a % damage reduction and a taunt button. One specialization would have to be given over to tanking. Demo makes sense mechanically and in lore.

[Raugnaut]

Xelnath said himself he had no idea how tanking classes were going to work, and that what DA became was built on the defunct Wrath model of tanking. That's why it didn't work, that's it was overpowered.
You find the defunct Wrath model of tanking that DA was built on compelling, but not the newer active mitigation model. I'm sorry, but a valid DA tank spec would necessarily be built on the latter for the purposes of game balance.

Actually, DA uses the active mitigation model in terms of you push buttons to mitigate incoming damage, as I explained in an earlier post. Rather then reducing the damage coming in, DA either A) spends Demonic Fury on a fairly powerful absorb ability to mitigate incoming damage, or B) lowers avoidance in exchange for a decent amount of self-healing (about 3% health regen per second modified by haste), which is even stronger then DK's self healing. But, essentially, a DA lock NOT using thier active mitigation would take more damage then a DA lock using thier active mitigation. Of course, the main thing about DA locks in the current implementation is that they are a "soak" tank, akin to Wrath bears. They have higher health/passive mitigation then other tanks in order to make up for the really low avoidance. Even then, for some tanks during Wrath, there was more active mitigation then during Cata (Shield block was a quick 30 second CD with 10 second duration, Holy Shield had to be pressed every 8 seconds, and all DK tanking specs could subsitute thier main damage ability with Death Strike for additional self healing. A tank not taking advantage of these cooldowns/abilities would take more damage and require more healing then a tank taking advantage of thier cooldowns.) During Wrath, these forms of active mitigation, with the exception of DKs, were removed. Holy Shield was removed entirely and Shield Block became a 1 min CD with 10 seconds of uptime, akin to a minor cooldown. So, if anything, MoP took some of the concepts of Wrath tanking and made them more prominent- SotR is essentially a Holy Shield on a ~8 second cooldown, Shield Block has double the uptime of Wrath shield block, and the active mitigation model was moved to the other tanks.

[Jessicka]

Actually, DA uses the active mitigation model in terms of you push buttons to mitigate incoming damage, as I explained in an earlier post. Rather then reducing the damage coming in, DA either A) spends Demonic Fury on a fairly powerful absorb ability to mitigate incoming damage, or B) lowers avoidance in exchange for a decent amount of self-healing (about 3% health regen per second modified by haste), which is even stronger then DK's self healing. But, essentially, a DA lock NOT using thier active mitigation would take more damage then a DA lock using thier active mitigation. Of course, the main thing about DA locks in the current implementation is that they are a "soak" tank, akin to Wrath bears. They have higher health/passive mitigation then other tanks in order to make up for the really low avoidance. Even then, for some tanks during Wrath, there was more active mitigation then during Cata (Shield block was a quick 30 second CD with 10 second duration, Holy Shield had to be pressed every 8 seconds, and all DK tanking specs could subsitute thier main damage ability with Death Strike for additional self healing. A tank not taking advantage of these cooldowns/abilities would take more damage and require more healing then a tank taking advantage of thier cooldowns.) During Wrath, these forms of active mitigation, with the exception of DKs, were removed. Holy Shield was removed entirely and Shield Block became a 1 min CD with 10 seconds of uptime, akin to a minor cooldown. So, if anything, MoP took some of the concepts of Wrath tanking and made them more prominent- SotR is essentially a Holy Shield on a ~8 second cooldown, Shield Block has double the uptime of Wrath shield block, and the active mitigation model was moved to the other tanks.

I can't quite figure out where you're going with this... You're telling me that DA works like a Wrath Bear, but could be modified, as other tank specs were, to have it's active mitigation and healing more prominent to bring it in line with the MoP active mitigation model? I think that's somewhere along the lines of what I'd implied and would be quite a change to the overall playstyle and bring them to somewhere akin to DKs who take more damage, but are able to heal it back to a greater degree than other tanks.

[Spl4sh3r]

I think Blizzard really need to move away from the whole Pure DPS classes. Just look at all new classes they have added. None of which are Pure DPS. So I hope they add a fourth specialization for all classes (that don't already have four). With either the new one being Healer or Tank or changing one existing to Healer or Tank. Meaning all classes will be Hybrids.

[Orange Joe]

Not necessarily - having only absorbs and a high base health pool as well as healing reduction can make it a big strain on healers. The damage will be constant, and in most cases unavoidable.

I was a healer for awhile. Constant damage is much easier to deal with than random spiky damage.

[Raugnaut]

I can't quite figure out where you're going with this... You're telling me that DA works like a Wrath Bear, but could be modified, as other tank specs were, to have it's active mitigation and healing more prominent to bring it in line with the MoP active mitigation model? I think that's somewhere along the lines of what I'd implied and would be quite a change to the overall playstyle and bring them to somewhere akin to DKs who take more damage, but are able to heal it back to a greater degree than other tanks.

To make my point a bit clearer, DA right now utilizes active mitigation. The difference between a DA lock using active mitigation and a DA lock not using active mitigation, though, is about 13% less damage taken/self healing, a significantly bigger difference compared to other tanks, where a tank who doesn't use active mitigation will require a significantly (~30%, up to 70% in the case of Monks) larger amount of healing to remain alive.. It would only require a few tweaks in order for DA locks active mitigation to be as strong as other tanks (vengeance scaling would significantly raise the amount of active mitigation they would do, for instance)

As I have stated before, all that would be required for warlock tanks is A) removal of DA glyph, B) addition of 4th spec that grants Dark Apotheosis/ working Provocation, and changes Shadowbolt into Demonic slash at lvl 10, and gives various tanking abilities as one lvls up, including extra armor compared to Demo's Metamorphasis and crit immunity, and C) allow the 4th spec to acquire vengeance from damage that gives SP instead of AP.

The SP scaling would be the only potential problem from what I could see in implementing Warlock Tanks.