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

[Deleted]

I'm guessing a lot of people would at least try it out /take it as an offspec.
I'm not sure why but you always seem to post on these forums in a way that you think you know everything. Why are you so against a CHOICE for players to be able to tank on a Warlock?

Because this class homogenization thing sucks. Warlocks are pure dmg dealers, thats how it is. There must be some limits in giving players CHOICE. That would be a precedent for making hunters shooting healing arrows, frost mage tanks etc. I suppose you would like that, but I would definitely not. Besides, the only reason for wanting this is that you would feel as something special (caster tank). All of us want this, thats why are we transmogrifiing sets noone has etc. The point is, your need would in the end cause everyone being the same.

[Deleted]

Bro, let me make this simple for you. If we gain a Tanking spec, your precious dps won't go to shit and no one is going to force you to tank or re-roll. After reading this thread, those are literally the only two reasons you've got for not wanting a Warlock tanking spec.

Which is twice as many as the people who want a warlock tank spec, which boils down to "because I do". People WOULD be forced into tanking, simple as that - it's like arguing people won't be forced to do any of the other things that we all know we are.

We currently have 3 classes that tank in plate and 2 that tank in leather. Warlocks and Shaman are good candidates for a tank in the other gear slots.

Do you not think there's a reason for that?

Why is warlocks and shamen being on a completely different, none-tanking gear template justification for them to tank? It's not like it's solving some problem by putting more people on a gear type that's otherwise being dusted.

Honestly, Demonology has never really been particularly better or distinguished from the other two Lock dps specs

I'm sorry, do you play a warlock? Demonology is pretty damn distinct now and has had plenty of times to shine, it was strong throughout Cata, starting as an AOE spec in T11 and then being an incredibly strong single target spec due to MWC through later tiers, it's been pretty good this expansion and looks like it's pulling ahead next tier - it's performance is fine and it's distinguished plenty via meta.

I don't think any other class is really sensible for a new tanking choice at this time.

I'm struggling to see how warlocks are or how we need any, it's been mentioned before that more options to tank, doesn't mean more people tanking, it's solving no problems, it's purely the whim of a playerbase wanting it for the sake of wanting it.

It just causes problems like opening the door to more people demanding a 4th spec, which the game can't easily support, pulling peoples pure class status out from under their legs after 8+ years of such a thing being unprecident, and adding what may as well be a new class into the balancing system.

[Skayth]

Because this class homogenization thing sucks. Warlocks are pure dmg dealers, thats how it is. There must be some limits in giving players CHOICE. That would be a precedent for making hunters shooting healing arrows, frost mage tanks etc. I suppose you would like that, but I would definitely not. Besides, the only reason for wanting this is that you would feel as something special (caster tank). All of us want this, thats why are we transmogrifiing sets noone has etc. The point is, your need would in the end cause everyone being the same.

I think you have it wrong. What makes giving Locks tanking making them Homogenized? Warlocks have never been the PURE dmg dealers that you so well tend to say. In Vanilla, WE TANKED a few bosses. BC, We TANKED another few bosses. In Wotk, we TANKED 3 bosses. Why? because we were amazing at it. And No, I dont think it would make me feel... special. Rather, I believe once they give us the 4th spec, they will give other three a spec to hybridize. Why? So that the pures are dead.

Pures have been decreasing in numbers over the years, cept mages as they have always been op in pvp. Rogues had their flavor of the month back when cata gave them legendaries, then after that, they immediately died. Locks have their flavor of the month now, with KJC, and after its nerfed, I think we will highly decrease in numbers again. Hunters have been decreasing over the years, but they are still alive. Hybridizing them all will not only suffice more people to play them, as they will have another role other than "DPS" and it would easily quench the thirst for another class that everyone thinks will come with next expansion. Hybridizing the 4 pures will also hit that nail in the coffin that they never plan to do another "pure" class ever again.

Locks should tank, Rogues should tank, Mages should heal, and hunters should heal. Thus evening everything out.

[nightfalls]

Rather, I believe once they give us the 4th spec, they will give other three a spec to hybridize. Why? So that the pures are dead.

Agreed, but I feel that hybridization needs to be done at the cost of a DPS spec for various reasons, the least of which is that 4 specs for all classes create extremely clumsy class balance.

That, or the 4th "support" role needs to be added in.

Pures have been decreasing in numbers over the years, cept mages as they have always been op in pvp. Rogues had their flavor of the month back when cata gave them legendaries, then after that, they immediately died. Locks have their flavor of the month now, with KJC, and after its nerfed, I think we will highly decrease in numbers again. Hunters have been decreasing over the years, but they are still alive.

Mages are also decreasing, and it's not like warlocks broke the top list of classes with the massive revamp. Excluding monks, warlocks went from bottom 2 in represenation to... bottom 2 in representation. The only difference is that the other bottom class, rogue, is now absolutely shit on. Hunters, on the other hand, are doing well, but even so they are basically carrying a deadweight spec that could easily be a hybrid spec instead, with some of its better elements rolled into the other, non-dead specs.

Again this brings up my point of actually obliterating a DPS spec and splitting/baking it into the other two specs. Adding more specs is just adding more bloat.

Locks should tank, Rogues should tank, Mages should heal, and hunters should heal. Thus evening everything out.

Again I don't think all of this is feasible without adding a 4th role. Hunters in particular would make for a better "support" role than healing/tanking.

[Jessicka]

Again I don't think all of this is feasible without adding a 4th role. Hunters in particular would make for a better "support" role than healing/tanking.

Odd then that that 'support' role is exactly what Warlocks were initially designed to be. The "debuffer" class.

Removing specs, regardless of whether they're "dead weight" as you put it, isn't going to happen. Removing Blood DPS and Frost (and even to a lesser extent UH) tanking was incredibly painful for a lot of players, and by all accounts the developers too. Maybe not the end game raiding players, who just gravitate towards the "best" spec anyway, but the ones who make up the entirety of the rest of the playerbase who play Marksman because their character is a fucking Marksman. It's not just a matter of which spec is viable in end game raiding or high end PvP. Deleting or changing the role of existing trees is just completely off the menu.

[CaptainArlong]

Problem is Ghostcrawler doesn't want that. When he retires, maybe we'll see it though.

Because after nearly 9 years of World of Warcraft, Blizzard will just up and change Warlocks so they can be tanks. Ghostcrawler, since before he was even hired, held Warlocks back from ever attaining their full potential.

[XDurionX]

As long as pet handling is that terrible there won´t be warlock or hunter tanks for sure. And there´s no possibilty/need to execute a rotation to keep the pet alive, making this a non-spec. There´s absolutely no way to balance something gamebreaking like this. May work for trash, sure, but if this could be used on bosses, while the warlock can keep his damage rotation, noone would roll another tank class. Maybe a fork from demonology where the warlock actively tanks and all his stats are converted, but tankig pets? No, thanks.

[Monkiy]

And tanking rogues/shamans (which tanked during relevant content).... but that will never happen.

Define relevant content. Shaman were barely able to tank during Vanilla up until level 40, when tank damage went up substantially. In all honesty, I think many classes could have managed that in the lower level content had they been given a threat mechanic as well. Rogues have only ever been a "tank" during a small time period in Black Temple's life cycle, and that set up was quickly adjusted so that it was no longer possible to be nigh un-hittable by a boss.

[Deleted]

You should say, we tanked a boss in SSC, in TK, in BT, in Sunwell and in ICC. Narrows it down to 4 tiers, out of 16. 5 bosses out of lolhowmany

And even mages got to tank during BC (High King Maulgar, Illidari Council).

[Monkiy]

And even mages got to tank during BC (High King Maulgar, Illidari Council).

The big difference is that those fights were designed with a particular class filling a very particular tanking role tailored to their one class. In no way was there a tanking specialization for the classes, they just followed a slightly different pattern to play boss mechanics.

[Theronus]

Or they could remove any resemblance of tanking from demonology and add that to a new class, Demon Hunter!

Now just let me get out of here before the rocks are thrown.

[Deleted]

Or they could remove any resemblance of tanking from demonology and add that to a new class, Demon Hunter!

Now just let me get out of here before the rocks are thrown.

*applauds thunderously*

Agreed, so much of the desires of people who want Warlock tanks could be fitted in Demon Hunters while letting those who WANT to play a Pure class (you know, which is why we selected Warlocks) to play one.

[Deleted]

Or you could you know, roll a tank.

I don't really feel like that is a sufficient argument against implementing a warlock tank, people asking for it are asking to tank on a warlock, that's a very specific request, simply telling someone to roll another tank that is not what they are asking for seems a little off, nothing against you though.

I feel like it could work, definately mechanicly, the only problem we might face is warlocks who are entirely used to being a pure dps class being pissed off with guilds/groups asking them to tank specific encounters, and that's not why alot of people rolled a warlock.

As for what I would like, I would totally like to see a tanking spec, could be really fun, what they have so far with the glyph is definately a different experience and I enjoy it when I get the chance to use it.

From most of the posts I read on this subject, most people against this are people who want to remain a pure dps class, there's nothing wrong with that, each to his own, but I would like to see some tanking viability with my lock, but it seems like something that seems to be a love or hate idea.

[Oneirophobia]

but I don't want to be a tank.

Can you quit suggesting this over and over again?

Yeah guys, c'mon, a game that millions and millions of people play boils down to what one person would have the option to do.

I don't want to heal on my priest, I'd wish people would stop suggesting they keep our healing trees up to date and balanced. I mean, just because the tools are there doesn't mean we have to have the spells scale into the next expansion, just leave the trees in the dust, stop balancing them, stop updating them, leave them at lvl 90. I hate options. /s


Anyways,
I see no issue in having a 4th spec for warlocks and tanking. I also see no issue in giving Shamans a 4th tree for tanking. We spend quite a while in queues waiting on tanks, I see no issue in giving two more tanking options to players. I don't like tanking on warriors, bears, monks, DKs, or paladins, perhaps I would (and I'm sure others as well) would jump at a chance to try something new.
I honestly don't understand the issue with options. Don't want to tank, don't tank. The buttons won't even exist to put on your bars if you don't spec for it.

---------- Post added 2013-06-23 at 06:00 AM ----------

I don't really feel like that is a sufficient argument against implementing a warlock tank, people asking for it are asking to tank on a warlock, that's a very specific request, simply telling someone to roll another tank that is not what they are asking for seems a little off, nothing against you though.

This is a very old argument. People used to use it when people asked for Shadow priests to be a viable DPS option. It used to be, quote, "just a leveling spec, priests are healers" and when people started asking for it to be "upgraded" to full-force DPS, many other players responded with "role a warlock" and "role a mage" and also the tried-and-true "every class doesn't need every option, what next, tanking priests?!" Yay slippery slopes..

Hopefully, though, these arguments won't stop Blizzard if they decide to discuss a tanking option for locks.

---------- Post added 2013-06-23 at 06:02 AM ----------

I've always wanted tanking locks. And tanking hunters.

Yes! I loved tanking with my turtle in lowbie instances. 4th tank spec for Shaman, Hunters and Locks. Mmmm.

---------- Post added 2013-06-23 at 06:03 AM ----------

Pure class

That doesn't, shouldn't, and hopefully never will mean anything.

---------- Post added 2013-06-23 at 06:13 AM ----------

As long as pet handling is that terrible there won´t be warlock or hunter tanks for sure. And there´s no possibilty/need to execute a rotation to keep the pet alive, making this a non-spec. There´s absolutely no way to balance something gamebreaking like this. May work for trash, sure, but if this could be used on bosses, while the warlock can keep his damage rotation, noone would roll another tank class. Maybe a fork from demonology where the warlock actively tanks and all his stats are converted, but tankig pets? No, thanks.

Of course there is possibility. We already have buttons that force pets to do things, I'm not sure why that trend wouldn't continue if a tanking pet tree came about. Send pet in, hit a button that makes your pet do an AoE threat grab like D&D or consecration, have a click-able pet-taunt for issues when you need to use that or taunt-off, and have some damage reduction cooldowns that you trigger from your bars. Kill Command could become something else that is virtually the same spell, but in the tank spec does a ton of threat and perhaps hits two targets like Pally's hammer.

Disable "revive pet" in combat, have your misdirect turn into a buffed passive, have the spec naturally have crappy damage and high threat just like other tanks. Hunter stats convert to tanking stats for the pet. The only real difference would be, once your pet dies, you can feign death until the wipe is over. Not sure what you'd do about the 95% AoE damage redux on your pet, might be able to leave it there on account of your hunter being vulnerable to it. Could do some interesting things with distracting shot to move the boss around... hm.

Would be tricky to master, for sure, but definitely something interesting to think about...

---------- Post added 2013-06-23 at 06:16 AM ----------

Bro, let me make this simple for you. If we gain a Tanking spec, your precious dps won't go to shit and no one is going to force you to tank or re-roll. After reading this thread, those are literally the only two reasons you've got for not wanting a Warlock tanking spec.

They're pretty valid arguments, I mean.

I never get to DPS on my boomkin, shadow priest, death knight, paladin, warri--- oh wait. Yes I do. And nobody says squat.

[Count Zero]

*applauds thunderously*

Agreed, so much of the desires of people who want Warlock tanks could be fitted in Demon Hunters while letting those who WANT to play a Pure class (you know, which is why we selected Warlocks) to play one.

Earnest questions: You selected Warlock solely because you wanted to play a pure dps class ? Why Warlock over the other pures ?

[Deleted]

Or they could remove any resemblance of tanking from demonology and add that to a new class, Demon Hunter!

Now just let me get out of here before the rocks are thrown.

Yes please, causes far less ramifications than a 4th spec or flat out axing a current one does.

The big difference is that those fights were designed with a particular class filling a very particular tanking role tailored to their one class. In no way was there a tanking specialization for the classes, they just followed a slightly different pattern to play boss mechanics.

So were the encounters warlocks tanked by spamming searing pain in resist gear.

Earnest questions: You selected Warlock solely because you wanted to play a pure dps class ? Why Warlock over the other pures ?

I rolled it because it was as close to a necromancer as I could get, but being a pure has become an incredibly important thing to me over the years as I started taking the game seriously.

That doesn't, shouldn't, and hopefully never will mean anything.

It already does, we're able to select three different ways to approach an encounter, if one dps spec is bad, we can use another one, or fit various different roles to an encounter.

Paladins are hammers - if ret isn't good, they just need to suck it up and make the best of it.

Pures can be a hammer, wrench or screwdriver, depending on what needs to be done, what performs best or simple player preference.

[Deleted]

I have no desire to have a warlock tank spec available at all. They cant make up their mind what they are doing with us and struggle to balance us as it is without giving them a whole new spec to balance us and adjust talents around.

i rolled a pure dps class and would like it to remain that way. ALL raid guild apps ask if you can play all specs and would you change if required, if you have a tank spec good raiders will be expected to learn the encounter from a tank POV aswell as be in the know about the spec. If it turns out that a warlock tanks excells on encounters and can cheese them you or 1 of your fellow warlock guildies will be expected to tank the encounter. Or if your tanks are afk especially in a 10 man guild and your tank options are short you will be made to tank or call a raid.

This is just stuff i personally dont want after playing a lock and pure dps for so long. I also despise melee and being in melee range as much as i like being in the middle of a sweaty hot group of bodies and having a front row seat of a big boss ass.

I would then feel i would have to reroll mage and be OP 99% of the time and where is the fun in that?

[Deleted]

Bro, let me make this simple for you. If we gain a Tanking spec, your precious dps won't go to shit and no one is going to force you to tank or re-roll. After reading this thread, those are literally the only two reasons you've got for not wanting a Warlock tanking spec.

This applies to every class regarding a new spec. Yeah let´s give Warlocks a tanking spec, Hunters and Rogues should heal and Mages could get both specs. no one would be forced to spec into them and the precious dps won´t go to shit so it´d be alright, am i right?

[luckydevours]

This applies to every class regarding a new spec. Yeah let´s give Warlocks a tanking spec, Hunters and Rogues should heal and Mages could get both specs. no one would be forced to spec into them and the precious dps won´t go to shit so it´d be alright, am i right?

Can you all stop repeating this nerve-racking argument how Mages, Hunters, Rogues or Shamans should get new roles too if Warlocks one day would officially be able to tank things. I know it's your fundamental desire to derail this serious request into oblivion with your false equivalences, but repeating this bullshit over and over doesn't make it anymore meaningful.

First this is a discussion in a warlock class forum, if other classes really want to have new roles then start a thread in the specific subforum instead of trying to dilute this topic. Secondly if you absolutly cannot stand the notion of warlocks tanking, just leave, pin your hopes on GC and stop irritating those who want to discuss this idea seriously. And third all those classes you mentioned never had a complete and functional additional role during a beta of a major expansion to WoW. The only reason warlock tanks are not a reality right now is GC didn't like it and deliberately axed it to a funny but not officially supported feature.

[Jessicka]

Can you all stop repeating this nerve-racking argument how Mages, Hunters, Rogues or Shamans should get new roles too if Warlocks one day would officially be able to tank things. I know it's your fundamental desire to derail this serious request into oblivion with your false equivalences, but repeating this bullshit over and over doesn't make it anymore meaningful.

First this is a discussion in a warlock class forum, if other classes really want to have new roles then start a thread in the specific subforum instead of trying to dilute this topic. Secondly if you absolutly cannot stand the notion of warlocks tanking, just leave, pin your hopes on GC and stop irritating those who want to discuss this idea seriously. And third all those classes you mentioned never had a complete and functional additional role during a beta of a major expansion to WoW. The only reason warlock tanks are not a reality right now is GC didn't like it and deliberately axed it to a funny but not officially supported feature.

No one is discussing it though, they're just saying for the umpteen millionth time that they want a Warlock tank.

The only reason Warlock tanking worked during MoP beta was because it was fundamentally broken, it did not adhere to the active mitigation model that all the other tanking trees were built around and by extention what encounters were designed around. It worked because it wasn't balanced as a tanking spec.

The reason it didn't go any further wasn't GC either, it was a design decision by the entire team that didn't want to remove Demonology as a DPS spec as it had become much more strongly established as such during Cataclysm and taking it away would have shit on a load of players. Further, they didn't want tanking accessible via a Glyph; they wanted a stronger commitment than that. If left in place it would have made Warlocks the default off-tank for everyone since they'd be able to maintain 100% DPS while not actually tanking which went far beyond what even Ferals had been doing for years and had caused issues in PvP and led to the splitting of the Feral and Guardian trees, and the Death Knight talent tree changes long before that.

And, looking at Twitter, they're having the exact same issue in PvP with DA even now, and given that, I'm wondering if the class as a whole might be better off without it at all.

---------- Post added 2013-06-23 at 02:19 PM ----------

Earnest questions: You selected Warlock solely because you wanted to play a pure dps class ? Why Warlock over the other pures ?

1, Even though I wasn't aware then, given what I know now I'd have made the same class decision. I like having 3 specs for the variety.

Further, on my DK and Priest I'm always asked if I can DPS/Heal; it's a slow creep that in Wrath I could avoid on the DK by having a Frost and Blood tanking spec, but in Cataclysm ultimately led to me getting a DPS spec and hating playing Frost, hating even more the arguments "But you're not tanking now" or conversely "But your main spec is Blood" over loot. It's just a shitty thing that's pointless and makes the game less enjoyable. It's why I bitch so much about one-tank fights having no place in the game. When it comes to Priest I just deny all knowledge of ability, but still the 'but please... Just try...' just gets annoying. I'd just rather not have myself or those asking in that position because it's embarrasing and leads to unnecessary friction. Even on my Shaman where I like Enhancement and Resto, it still bugs me when I want to join a raid as one but get pestered to play the other.

2, Not Rogue, not big on melee DPS. Not Hunter, prefer caster types. Leaves me with Mage or Warlock, I enjoy both but I feel Warlock has more going for it in terms of playstyles and I just prefer the darker aspect, lore, tier sets etc.