Remove the 10% more damage taken on Berserker stance?

[spankey]

Hi Everybody

I had quite some Discussions with my friends over this issue and i would like to hear your opinion.

In my opinion they should change it to 10% less armor, because it would be fair to other melee users but also reduce the absolute dominance of magical users over warriors

What do you think?

[Wilhelmi]

I never had any big problems with casters if I played with a healer like you should be too :-X B-stance spellreflect is your friend if it's getting close.

[spankey]

I never had any big problems with casters if I played with a healer like you should be too :-X B-stance spellreflect is your friend if it's getting close.

Try to spellreflect or even equip a shield while being stunlocked in serker stance with absolutely no avoidance (no parry, no dodge) :-X

[Crimsonak]

Warriors have much bigger problems to fix first, such as rend being the most useless skill in the game.
Such as the charge/intercept bug where if you intercept someone who is jumping they will land 5ft infront of you and due to chances being you will be slowed you wont be able to reach them in time.
Such as tactical mastery just being in the plain wrong talent tree.

Fix those way before you start thinking about such tiny details like Berzerker Stance.

[Ufalah]

The problem is that of scaling. 10% damage continually scales. @ level 60 you took 10% more damage from all sources. Now @ level 70 you take 10% more damage from all sources, regardless of how good your gear is. The 3% crit does not scale however. As you gain more crit etc from your gear, that 3% becomes less and less important. If it was changed to 15% more attack power or something that improved as you improved I think that would be more understandable.

P.S. From a pvp standpoint, resilience negates the 3% crit but you take more damage. Gay.

[Ufalah]

Warriors have much bigger problems to fix first, such as rend being the most useless skill in the game.
Such as the charge/intercept bug where if you intercept someone who is jumping they will land 5ft infront of you and due to changes being you are slowed you wont be able to reach them ib time.
Such as tactical mastery just being in the plain wrong talent three.

Fix those way before you start thinking about such tiny details like Berzerker Stance.

Tactical mastery is designed to be a way to allow arms / fury spec warriors to tank when needed. "increases threat done by MS / BldThrst."

[Crimsonak]

Tactical mastery is designed to be a way to allow arms / fury spec warriors to tank when needed. "increases threat done by MS / BldThrst."

Which will only really work on normals these days, or an incredibly well prot geared warrior in arms spec.
It's just outdated to have it like that.
It used to be in the arms tree, and if its designed to make arms/fury spec to be able to tank, doesnt it make sense to have it in one of those trees.

[Mith]

Why make something to help arms warriors/fury warriors and then put it in the prot tree when that was what you wanted to avoid in the first place? strange logic honestly.

[Utal]

Why make something to help arms warriors/fury warriors and then put it in the prot tree when that was what you wanted to avoid in the first place? strange logic honestly.

Don't Prot warriors stance dance too?

[Ufalah]

Which will only really work on normals these days, or an incredibly well prot geared warrior in arms spec.
It's just outdated to have it like that.
It used to be in the arms tree, and if its designed to make arms/fury spec to be able to tank, doesnt it make sense to have it in one of those trees.

Well, like you said, well-geared right? An arms warrior tanked my daily heroic the other day. Tactical mastery is one way blizzard allows warriors to try to have a non-cookie cutter. Some people spec into it, others do 31-30. I personally like having tactical mastery for the extra rage for overpower or spell reflect.

It is an option, it isn't meant to be available to everyone.

[neh0e]

armour reducation does't effect spells so your kind of calling the kettle black here and the discussion between 2 people with 2 brain cells must of been intense.

you want casters to deal less damage on you yet, you think a mid way point for both would be to have it lower armour instead.

somehow this doesn't make sense at all nice try though....

[Myzrael]

Yes remove the 10% - 3 (5.4%)
Change it to 10% less armor - 5 (8.9%)
Yes remove the 10% AND the 3% crit - 1 (1.8%)
Yes remove it, but add something else (explain in Post) - 1 (1.8%)
No, it's fine l2p - 46 (82.1%)

I think this explains

[Belajas]

The problem is that of scaling. 10% damage continually scales. @ level 60 you took 10% more damage from all sources. Now @ level 70 you take 10% more damage from all sources, regardless of how good your gear is. The 3% crit does not scale however. As you gain more crit etc from your gear, that 3% becomes less and less important. If it was changed to 15% more attack power or something that improved as you improved I think that would be more understandable.

P.S. From a pvp standpoint, resilience negates the 3% crit but you take more damage. Gay.

Well, that 3% increased crit still scales even if you would be lvl80. While leveling and getting better gear you constantly need to get bigger amounts of either ratings or agility since they downscale with higher level, whereas 3% crit is and stays 3% crit...

[Mith]

Don't Prot warriors stance dance too?

I've tanked in BT and lower. Never spent points in tactical mastery for prot spec.
Places where you stance dance (1boss in kara) you don't have any need for the rage saved really.
That's my personal experience anyway.

[Crimsonak]

Well, like you said, well-geared right? An arms warrior tanked my daily heroic the other day. Tactical mastery is one way blizzard allows warriors to try to have a non-cookie cutter. Some people spec into it, others do 31-30. I personally like having tactical mastery for the extra rage for overpower or spell reflect.

It is an option, it isn't meant to be available to everyone.

Just because it's a very small option, doesn't mean it need to be in that tree.
No prot warriors take it.
It would still be available to everyone and yet be useful for its other function aswell as its threat in a low tier of a different tree.

The fact that 0.1% of warriors, ex prot warriors. Can use this talent effectivly, is no where near justification of having it in that tree.

Don't Prot warriors stance dance too?

Yes but only to pop berzerker rage, which costs nothing.
At a push you could say Charge>Defensive stance.
Not many people do that though since most of the time ranged pulls are required.

[maksi.]

no, its fine, l2p
and my main is a warrior :> but imo you can easily avoid heavy burst by switching to defstance (prolly some warris might have trouble with stancedancing if they dont have tm skilled)
but if they removed those 10% more dmg taken, then defstance/battle stance would become useless in pvp...

[Quazord]

10% more damage gives a warrior more rage. What exactly is the problem?

Wanna take less dmg? Go defensive.

It works for pvp and pve.

[Power]

shut up.

[Geboran]

The stance is set that way to show just how "reckless" a warrior is when in that stance -- a choice.

10% is pretty minimal; it could realistically be more like 5% - 25%.

Look forward to WoTLK; you'll have more to work with then.

[spankey]

armour reducation does't effect spells so your kind of calling the kettle black here and the discussion between 2 people with 2 brain cells must of been intense.

you want casters to deal less damage on you yet, you think a mid way point for both would be to have it lower armour instead.

somehow this doesn't make sense at all nice try though....

I just want to take the same magical damage as every other class in game!
The -10% armor is just in so we are not getting even more op against rogues