Does Fury feel bland right now?

[Deleted]

My Fury experience:

Q: Does Fury feel bland right now?
Answer: No, it doesn't. It feels dynamic and furious.

Q: Is Fury relatively simple?
Answer: Compared to whom? Compared to a Feral specced in SR and BT - yes, Fury is definitely simple. Compared to the rest - it's about the same challenge. There are still a ton of ways to minmax your damage output. First and foremost - do not stand in a fire and do not shit on your raid.
Simple is not a bad thing. Simple is robust.

Q: Is Fury fun and engaging?
Answer: Yes, it is! There are also no obvious flaws with the spec, especially with the proper nonpassive talents and a decent gear it feels good.

Q: Is Fury doing good damage?
Answer: At the current average 350 ilev - it is okay but maybe slightly below a good Arms. Could use some minor buff but maybe at 380 it will be very competitative as it is. Fury is also consistent in damage provided that you have uptime on your target.

Q: Is there some room for improvement?
Answer: There always is. As with everything. I would ask for a redesign or complete removal of the passive talents such as Inner Rage and Meat Cleaver. (maybe Reckless Abaddon also?)
There could be an option to trade a % of the frontload damage for a short-term bleed. Because a bleed 1) provides damage consistency in PvE when you can not maintain uptime 2) ignores Armor therefore reduces the variance in the Fury (PvP) damage; also rogues 3) sounds cool

People are inherently biased towards their favourite playstyle. Right now I like both Fury and Arms. The latter however lacks any decent self-sustainability outside a healer buddy.

[Kaiisabi]

My Fury experience:

Q: Does Fury feel bland right now?
Answer: No, it doesn't. It feels dynamic and furious.

Q: Is Fury relatively simple?
Answer: Compared to whom? Compared to a Feral specced in SR and BT - yes, Fury is definitely simple. Compared to the rest - it's about the same challenge. There are still a ton of ways to minmax your damage output. First and foremost - do not stand in a fire and do not shit on your raid.
Simple is not a bad thing. Simple is robust.

Q: Is Fury fun and engaging?
Answer: Yes, it is! There are also no obvious flaws with the spec, especially with the proper nonpassive talents and a decent gear it feels good.

Q: Is Fury doing good damage?
Answer: At the current average 350 ilev - it is okay but maybe slightly below a good Arms. Could use some minor buff but maybe at 380 it will be very competitative as it is. Fury is also consistent in damage provided that you have uptime on your target.

Q: Is there some room for improvement?
Answer: There always is. As with everything. I would ask for a redesign or complete removal of the passive talents such as Inner Rage and Meat Cleaver. (maybe Reckless Abaddon also?)
There could be an option to trade a % of the frontload damage for a short-term bleed. Because a bleed 1) provides damage consistency in PvE when you can not maintain uptime 2) ignores Armor therefore reduces the variance in the Fury (PvP) damage; also rogues 3) sounds cool

People are inherently biased towards their favourite playstyle. Right now I like both Fury and Arms. The latter however lacks any decent self-sustainability outside a healer buddy.

This. Right here. You hit the nail on the head.

[Deleted]

My Fury experience:

Q: Does Fury feel bland right now?
Answer: No, it doesn't. It feels dynamic and furious.

Q: Is Fury relatively simple?
Answer: Compared to whom? Compared to a Feral specced in SR and BT - yes, Fury is definitely simple. Compared to the rest - it's about the same challenge. There are still a ton of ways to minmax your damage output. First and foremost - do not stand in a fire and do not shit on your raid.
Simple is not a bad thing. Simple is robust.

Q: Is Fury fun and engaging?
Answer: Yes, it is! There are also no obvious flaws with the spec, especially with the proper nonpassive talents and a decent gear it feels good.

Q: Is Fury doing good damage?
Answer: At the current average 350 ilev - it is okay but maybe slightly below a good Arms. Could use some minor buff but maybe at 380 it will be very competitative as it is. Fury is also consistent in damage provided that you have uptime on your target.

Q: Is there some room for improvement?
Answer: There always is. As with everything. I would ask for a redesign or complete removal of the passive talents such as Inner Rage and Meat Cleaver. (maybe Reckless Abaddon also?)
There could be an option to trade a % of the frontload damage for a short-term bleed. Because a bleed 1) provides damage consistency in PvE when you can not maintain uptime 2) ignores Armor therefore reduces the variance in the Fury (PvP) damage; also rogues 3) sounds cool

People are inherently biased towards their favourite playstyle. Right now I like both Fury and Arms. The latter however lacks any decent self-sustainability outside a healer buddy.

Don't get me wrong, i've always preferred fury but this current iterration feels horrible. Enrage uptime is way too low to make the spec fun, the spec itself requires absolutely no brain activity to play and it has no tools to do anything better than what arms does. Also having only one rage dump button is so hilariously boring.

[Viking]

Don't get me wrong, i've always preferred fury but this current iterration feels horrible. Enrage uptime is way too low to make the spec fun, the spec itself requires absolutely no brain activity to play and it has no tools to do anything better than what arms does. Also having only one rage dump button is so hilariously boring.

I will agree it doesn't bring anything unique or do anything better than arms can. Which makes it rather redundant. I disagree that it's any more brain neutral than the vast majority of specs in this game, including arms. Both are easy.

Also my enrage uptime is quite good. Over 75% on most fights. /shrug

[Hoeth]

Enrage uptime is way too low to make the spec fun, the spec itself requires absolutely no brain activity to play and it has no tools to do anything better than what arms does.

Enrage uptime should be over 60% at this point, which makes its portion of damage affected by mastery on the higher end.

And the spec requires no more or less "brain activity" than arms. Suggesting otherwise is either disingenuous or ignorant.

As for no tools, well, neither spec has much in the way of utility. Both are AOE damage bots but that's not really unique or too much of a problem outside of trying to push higher M+ keys.

[R74NN]

I love Fury now. It seems it kinda prevents me from getting in the groups, but I like the play style anyway.

[Specialka]

Arms is far easier to play than fury. It is so slow and boring, and the animations are rather hideous.

[f3llyn]

Anything is better than Arms. I just don't understand that spec. You're raged starve most of the time. It honestly feels like a broken spec.

That's how I feel about it too. I just don't understand the spec, it feels like I'm doing nothing about 60% of the time.

[Blazur]

The rotation is okay, it flows well but you're right that there isn't a defining moment in the gameplay. I'm still really upset they reverted the reck animation. It was the only thing that gave us any flair.

[Casio]

I've basically played fury in every version of WoW. It has, and always will be so that fury gets its moment in the sun when the gear is better, usually second to third raid tier. I just wish we had some more utility so pugs would actually be interested in taking a warrior. It just sucks when everyone has a million things they can do to cc a target, or survive damage, and all I can do is shout every 3 minutes, or hope something stands near me so I can heal with BS/Enrage Reg.