This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Warriors V Paladins: Tanking
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
blademeld
True enough, but as far as I'm concerned, Ensidia chose warriors in tBC and stated that they chose warriors because they had the best tanking methods, they could have made a tanking paladin or druid just as easily if they so desired. I'm certain that holds true in WotLK in their opinion.
In my own experience, a guild mate changed to a Death Knight tank in WotLK and took over one of the regular tanking rolls, so I don't think it's all that restrictive. Regarding ret paladins turned prot... I haven't met any one of those yet and I hope not to.
I was pointing out that yes, you want to use Shield Block as often as possible, but if you know that you're in trouble and a big hit is coming, you can delay Shield Block, and yes, that was a rather weak point, however, I'd still prefer Shield Block to Holy Shield any day for my playstyle.
Post by
Sakkura
True enough, but as far as I'm concerned, Ensidia chose warriors in tBC and stated that they chose warriors because they had the best tanking methods, they could have made a tanking paladin or druid just as easily if they so desired. I'm certain that holds true in WotLK in their opinion.
In TBC, blizzard were still dedicated to a design philosophy that made warriors the prime MTs, while paladins were AoE tanks. This has most certainly changed since then, and to assume that has no bearing on the game is a bit of a stretch.
When it comes to Ensidia, their GM is the best known WoW player and just so happens to be a warrior tank. There may be some institutional reluctance to toss him aside completely, even in a guild like theirs. Singularly skilled players are just that - singular.
I know quite a lot of warrior tanks who have had their warriors since vanilla. Most of them just so happen to be MTs of their respective guilds.
Post by
blademeld
Yes, and that holds true for my guild as well, the MT being a warrior. However, the point I was trying to make was that even though Ensidia has a staple warrior MT from Vanilla, their OT's do change, but always a warrior.
From their single-minded recruitment style in tBC, I doubt that it's a coincidence.
Post by
Sakkura
It's not a coincidence, it's a holdover. Just like vertebrates have a really stupid arrangement of the windpipe and esophagus that allows us to choke on food, simply because that was the way things were first put together millions of years ago. Swapping things around now is not feasible, even if there is a clear advantage to be had down the line.
Post by
blademeld
So you're just calling them stubborn...
Post by
Sakkura
Well, you have to be stubborn to raid hardcore, wiping on the same boss over and over until you get it right.
But in any case, that's not all that is at play. Imagine they decided to replace Kungen. Not only would that give a lot of organisational chaos (would he leave? maybe others would follow? who would lead the guild after his departure?), but you'd also have an important spot to fill. Sure they could find an excellent player of the preferred class, but would he be ready to perform at quite the level of Kungen? Might it take some time before the replacement reached his full potential, leaving them no better off in the meantime (or maybe even worse off temporarily)?
A lot of maybe's, and I doubt they like such risks, given that the potential rewards are not huge (at least in my book warriors are not completely useless, just missing a bit here and there).
Post by
blademeld
That's persistance, in correlation is stubbornness, but not the same thing.
Anywho, like I said before, it's not just MT (Kungen) but the OTs always being warriors/druids as well.
I don't think the stubbornness arguement really carries over for them as well with the changes in healing classes and DPS classes as they were introduced in tBC (paladins) and WotLK (DKs).
Either way, there are people who consider warriors to be the only tanks (still) and there are those who think warriors are no longer valid tanks, I for one, will consider the player, not the class any day.
After all, you agree that the differences are so huge that they are detrimental.
Something I want to ask, Sunder Armor increases the damage for all physical DPS's right?
Post by
Sakkura
After all, you agree that the differences are so huge that they are detrimental.
Something I want to ask, Sunder Armor increases the damage for all physical DPS's right?
Yes and yes (if you include a "not" in the first sentence). Expose armor is just as good, but does mean a modest loss of DPS for a rogue. Sunder can also be provided by a DPS warrior but again at a loss of DPS (probably less than for the rogue though). It is a nice utility to have. Paladins have their upsides too, though.
Post by
blademeld
Yes and yes (if you include a "not" in the first sentence).
Oops...
Expose armor is just as good, but does mean a modest loss of DPS for a rogue. Sunder can also be provided by a DPS warrior but again at a loss of DPS (probably less than for the rogue though). It is a nice utility to have. Paladins have their upsides too, though.
Was just curious because of the "damage decrease" argument from the warrior community. And I doubt that DPS warriors enjoy the extra threat from Sunder Armor.
Yes, the argument is invalid if there's another warrior tank on the same mob, however, paladin judgements are pointless with two ret/holy paladins in the raid.
Post by
Porcell
Was just curious because of the "damage decrease" argument from the warrior community. And I doubt that DPS warriors enjoy the extra threat from Sunder Armor.
Yeah, but it's not really extra threat. By doing Sunder Armor they are getting 360+5%AP as threat, so around maybe 800 threat. However, if they had used that GCD to do an actual damaging attack they would have hit with their weapon for anywhere from 3k-8k damage.
The attack does a lot more threat than a sunder armor does.
Post by
Salami
It is pretty clear that paladins are overpowered in all their specs, appart from holy (I think).
Prot does seem to be one of the most overpowered, more so than Ret if i have to be honest, seeing undergeared tanks doing 2.5k+ dps, unbuffed on a Naxx10 boss made me come onto this site to find out whats up with this..
Post by
Salami
The worst part for me as a warrior tank is that paladins with worse gear than me not only do more damage, take hits better andhave higher hp than me, but they always get picked as the MT without question over a warrior in a PuG.
Post by
Sakkura
Don't ever judge by how pugs choose.
Post by
Salami
Don't ever judge by how pugs choose.
Yeah i only PuG so its a bit hard not too, maybe just my problem.
Post by
427335
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Dralas
What I would like to find out is if Blizzard is ever going to change the stamina multiplier between warriors and paladins.
Post by
hashmel
doubtful, remember the old DK auras and how they were comparable/on par with pally auras? remember how those are no longer in game? lol
blizzard's hierarchy is as such
paladins
GOD
money
warriors/druids/death knights/priests/warlocks/rogues/shaman/mages/hunters
Mankrik's wife
paladins need a major rebalancing, warriors need a major talent overhaul, other classes need things as well but this thread isn't about them
a player of no skill shouldn't be almost as good/equal to/better than a player of moderate to good skill in every/most departments simply because the no skill player is a paladin while the other is a warrior
Catagory--------------------------------------------------------------------------Winner
mitigation--------------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
avoidance-------------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
effective health-------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
oh %^&* capabilities--------------------------------------------------------------paladin
aoe threat-------------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
single target threat--------------------------------------------------------------
TIE
utility-------------------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
less need for expertise allowing more gearing for survivability------paladin
talent point efficiency--------------------------------------------------------paladin
buffs---------------------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
solo capabilities------------------------------------------------------------------paladin
the factors to balance around are, survivability, utility, and damage. if one has superior survivability they should have inferior damage or utility, if one has superior damage they should have inferior survivability or utility, etc. paladins shouldn't be the exception here having superior survivability, damage, and utility.
the warrior trees are ancient relics by now still costing 5 points to do the same or even slightly less than others can get for 2-3 talent points
the game should be ~2/3 bring the player not the class but in this case it's ~90% bring the pally not the warrior tank as a paladin with no skill will shine just as brightly as a warrior with moderate to good skill
"prot pallies are like sex and pizza...when you're good you're really good, when you're bad you're still pretty damn good"
Post by
kamodius
The funny thing here to me is that warrior or paladin (I have an 80 pally tank and I'm levelling a warrior because warrior is actually more fun) tank notwithstanding, we're both screwed with a well-geared mage sometimes, or a psycho-critting destro lock...
So does it matter?
/shifthate warlocks :D
Post by
475661
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331063
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.