This is not Blizzard's design at fault, it's a raid's policies. A raid won't make or break depending on its rogues/warriors/hunters' weapons and especially not if a caster has a certain weapon. It's a collective effort, and if a raid leader wants every single member min/maxed (probably only Nihilum does this in the world), then yes...the weapons would be necessary. There are blacksmithing weapons, instance drops, rep stuff, etc. PVE is not competition besides world firsts/server firsts, what another guild does in a raid has no direct effect on your own guild. "Raiding competitively" does not exist in my opinion, however competition does exist in PVP. The major point I'm making is min/maxing and PVP weapons are not Blizzard's fault but a raid or personal desires.

"Also, keep this in mind NONE OF MY SUGGESTED WEAPON MODS HAVE TO BE WHAT BLIZZARD LOOKS AT. I'm not a game designer, I'm sure they could spend the time to come up with bonuses that would make them worth using in pvp but not in raids. Stop saying that my suggestions, or other people's suggestions for bonuses don't work, think about the idea, not the specifics."

If millions of people AND Blizzard can't really come up with a good idea regarding PVP weapons as well as the issue with certain classes in 5s (Hunter MS shot.......................), it's obviously not as easy as people think. I understand the idea, but solutions are hard to come up with such a touchy and opinionated area of the game. Allow me to give you an example: Warrior Intercept-Since beta if you were snared, there was a possibility for you to end up x amount of yards away from your target. It was only in a recent patch that they actually fixed this bug disguised as a "Buff" where it suppresses movement-impairing effects. Removing it was considered overpowered, where I agree...but it was like this for 2 years.

Uhhh... what? I got gladiator easily in season 1, and will do so again this season, and I play 10 games a week 90% of the time. My team does no significant strategy planning sessions or anything of the sort. 10 minutes to re-spec, 1-2 hours of PVP, and then spec back to PVE. If you are going for #1 spot on a hyper-competitive battlegroup, then yeah, you have to work your ass off for the arena. Outside of those teams though, there's no reason at all that you have to put much effort in at all.

First of all, this is a load of bullshit. Every guild in the game is "competitive" even if only with themselves to kill stuff as fast as they can, as efficiently as they can, so that they can progress further and hopefully catch up. No blizzard didn't say "hey if you don't pvp you'll never kill a boss!" but it's a noticeable difference, and just as noticeable as raid weapons in pvp. Please don't make up shit about no one caring about how fast or efficient they are after the world firsts, because you're wrong. You can have the opinion that "raiding competitively" doesn't exist, but your opinion is wrong. Maybe my opinion is that the world is flat, that doesn't mean I'm not being retarded. I sure know we didn't get any world firsts in BT, but we still pushed and expected our members to do what they could.

A rogue with shitty weapons is not going to be recruited by a good guild, if he wants to progress and hasn't had good luck in drops, he has to pvp. Seriously, just because you pvp and don't raid doesn't make you any different from any other player, there's still competition and pushing.

There is no point here to having the discussion about "blizzard can't" for all we know they haven't even tried, and you're just trying to dismiss the idea so that you can keep getting your high dps weapons from welfare arena epics or even higher dps ones, that's not a fair argument. How many people have you even seen debating the different ideas for weapon equips, so far in this thread I saw myself and one other person posting a few ideas we though of really quickly, saying that it's impossible to balance without seeing blizzard try is just ignorance. With 9 million subscribers or whatever, clearly they've learned how to make a pretty good game, and I'm not going to sell them short and say they can't do something without them trying.

I dont need pvp weapons for pve, I dont need good enchants or blue gems, I dont need a pve spec or to analysis my performance with wws to see what can be improved . I do so because I like to be the best I can within the limits of random drops. If enough people arent doing that then you too can have the joy of multiple enrage wipes to hydross 2 months after 1st kill.

We are competing with ourselves to improve, we are competing with the 5 other Australian guilds at similar levels of progression on our server for new recruits, and to fullfull peoples desires to see new content "To them".

I pvp on my warlock because I enjoy it, I pvp on my paladin because thats the best way to get the gear. To me their is a difference.

competition - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Obviously you misunderstood what I think "raiding competitively" means. Let me explain further, raiding requires to team to function. Your team's opposition is a computer generated mob, not another team of players. Therefore, any other team on your server has no direct effect on how you progress and perform in a raid. There are indirect effects obviously with getting server firsts, but that is just an attitude, not actual competition. Yea sure, you pushed your members to go for kills and do what they were expected to do, but the only thing stopping your guild was the computer generated mob. A mob cannot adapt and get better vs. their opponent, they have a pre-assigned job and design and that's all they can fulfill. In a team vs. team game such as PVP, the competition is derived from the ability of players to adapt. The only definition of competition I see fitting what you said is number 2 of my link which is a contest for a prize or "honor". And I never said people don't care about effeciency or quickness after Nihilum's kills, obviously that's false considering how close Cursed/Forte/DNT and other top guilds were behind them.

A rogue with shitty weapons will not be recruited by a good guild, yea...there are still alternatives to arena weapons in PVE for almost everything except OH swords. A ___ with shitty gear overall with not be recruited by a good guild. I don't know if you're referencing an SSC/TK guild or a BT/Hyjal guild, but there are weapons starting at 87+ DPS in kara and the jump begins at 93 in SSC/TK which is being buffed next patch. This is a game of progression and you have to account for a player's progression when you're talking about gear. If you're talking about BT/Hyjal, then most likely the person's overall gear will be considered and if that player was in an SSC/TK progressed guild...it is likely that person's gear will be sufficient. Again, I don't see it as a bad thing that players have the option/alternative to acquire arena weapons in this case?

Now in response to your last paragraph, Blizzard has been aware and trying to resolve the issue around Druids/Hunters/Rogues in 5v5 arena. It's been many months since they've been aware but no solutions represented besides hunter MS shot. Now it's just speculation, but they're probably having difficulty finding a balanced solution to these problems if it has been this long. Also see my post about warrior's bugged intercept for 2+ years.

Finally, "Seriously, just because you pvp and don't raid doesn't make you any different from any other player, there's still competition and pushing." That's quite a nice assumption to make, but the fact is I both raid and PVP. My guild is currently working on Mother Shahraz. I've been through the naxx "competition", and it wasn't other guild's progress on my server that got us through to 4H and a couple server firsts...it may have been a part in sparking it, but it was about a raid's performance and determination to progress that killed bosses. I play both sides of the game and more real time hours are invested in raiding as well, so don't assume that I don't know what you're talking about.

This is exactly what I'm saying. Players like us who min/max to improve our character have a better oppurtunity to do so with the alternative of PVP weapons. It's not a bad thing, and the people who see it as such blame Blizzard which I see as silly when it's based on an individual's attitude towards the game. I may have been wrong to say competition in PVE does not exist, but it depends on your definition of competition. I was thinking more along the lines of a competition being team vs. team such as NFL games where the other team directly affects what you're going to do and adaptation is necessary on both sides.

To add: You mentioned good enchants and blue gems for PVE min/maxing. The discussion here is about how PVP weapons (one maybe two slots of an entire character) affect raid progression and performance. The fact of the matter is if people have decent weapons and have the best enchants and blue gems otherwise, the extra dps on a weapon isn't going to make or break MOST boss kills. It's going to be based on individual and team skill in killing a boss, not one piece of an entire character of an entire team.

I got Gladiator in 5s and 3s and my 5v5 team played 50-75 games (can't remember exact number of games) with a 2 warr 2 pally 1 sham lineup and got gladiator at the end of the season. The collective talent of all 5 players will always be the biggest deciding factor but we were on the Cyclone battlegroup with very little competition and a very small percentage of actually talented players that played arena. It was easy for us to get gladiator in that small time frame. Now my new team has transferred over to the Bloodlust battlegroup. Needless to say, there is a lot more competition and a lot more skilled teams that play regularly as compared to Cyclone. The front page on Cyclone was also something like 20-30% 2 warr 3 healer teams which I believe to be a skilless/cheese team whereas Bloodlust has none of these in the top 50 of which I am aware. Both battlegroups are very different in the amount of competition and skilled players that play regularly.

I also don't understand the point of Dinadass' post? You play for points (10 games per week) and the gladiator title (bragging about how easily you got this...), not every PVPer arenas for the same reason that you do. Some PVPers like to play for the fun of arena and competition it provides. No, it doesn't take much effort to play 10 games per week and get a gladiator title at the end of it, but you're PVPing for different reasons than others (loot/title). PVErs can do this just as easily as members of progressed raiding guild, will tag along to raids and only get consumables when absolutely necessary...never an officer or contributes anything to a raid other than their specific role. You can be casual or have a casual attitude and still progress towards BT but never be at the top. You can be casual or have a casual attitude and still progress in the arena system but never be at the top. Obviously if you're hardcore about either, you can progress at a faster rate and be closer to the top. Assuming talent is high for both aspects...

Once again it is a guy with T6 raiding gear going "I specced pvp for my night and I got 1900 rating easily, why can't you?" Well we're not raiding T6 for one. If you don't think your high amounts of T5 and T6 raiding gear give you a massive advantage over people relying on blues, crafted gear and Kara epics than I don't know what else I can say.

As for Lodekim, you said "I like the way it is now where raid weapons are the best, it benefits me the most". You didn't say that you benefit the most from things being that way. That is a simple fact. What you said is you like it being that way, and since all your points are about nerfing PVP items in PVE with none about nerfing PVE items in PVP then what am I supposed to think? I see very little fair about your points, when you focus entirely on nerfing S2 weapons that are soon going to be inferior to second tier raid items and in many cases already are. Sure Blizzard can come up with some interesting ways to do it, but why is it necessary?

One thing no one has explained is why is PVP weapons being comparable to T5 an issue worth reworking the system of how weapons work in all facets of the game while T5/6 items including huge dps weapons are perfectly ok to be used in PVP for the advantage of raiders? Is the threat of S2 weapons to T5 raiders worth hurting PVP and promoting T6 raiders to an even bigger advantage than they have now?

I'm not very good at PvP and wearing mostly t4 gear. (I'm actually PvP'ing primarily for healing upgrades and to help others out now that I've got my s2 weapon for tanking with.) That said, with a team of people like me, we rolled every team we faced with a rating of under 1500, then got repeatedly rolled as soon as we went over 1500 in our battlegroup. The people who were rolling us were in at least 1800+ teams, for the most part. (I checked.) Not a single one of the teams that was holding us back was geared in anything better than t4 outside of PvP gear.

Honestly, the biggest problem I'm finding with trying to get into PvP now is that there are no real 1500-1600 rated teams in my battlegroup. Queue as we may, we won every game where our rating was below 1500 and lost as soon as the rating was over 1500.

T6 gear in arenas goes beyond not hurting me, it has not affected me yet. I've yet to see it. The people wearing just t4/crafted epics/blues stall pretty quickly. At the high-end, there is no evidence of a pressing concern with t6 teams dominating arenas, judging by the quick study done a few pages back. Your posts are alarmism in response to a valid problem that is actually being faced by PvE'ers.

Actually, his system would have made raid weapons inferior for PvP, because 10 DPS would not compare to +10% effectiveness on MS, for example. 30 +healing compared to 10% chance to resist interrupt effects would make one decidedly inferior for PvE whilst the other was at least as good for PvP.

Changing PvP weapons so that they are not great in PvE makes it possible to change them so that they are unequivocably superior to raiding weapons for PvP. Leaving the system the way it is makes it continue to be unsatisfactory for both sides. They can't buff PvP weapons any farther than they are now without making every PvE weapon useless, and they can't nerf PvE weapons for the exact same reason. PvP gear from arenas tends to compare fairly well to PvE gear because it doesn't need to be held back - Resilience artificially holds it back far enough that even with inequal ilvls, PvP gear is worse for PvE and superior for PvP. The biggest problem is that there are item slots with poor PvP itemization - cape, rings, etc that have substantial PvE upgrades, especially for those classes which do not heavily value Resilience. Making Resilience more valuable for Paladins, etc, allows for PvP itemization that is comparable to PvE itemization in arenas whilst inferior in raids.

Complaining because the current system favours PvE'ers at the high end whilst refusing to acknowledge that the PvP-favouring at the low-end affects more people and affects them more severely is extremely self-centered.

Brainstorming a bit, if it doesnt make sense its very late

Much of the problems seem to be that PvE items are good in PvP and and PvP items, like weapons, are good for PvE. Instead of trying to separate these is there a reasonable way to combine them? For example resilience will affect DoT damage soon, I cant think of any off the top of my head, but that could be good for a fight where the raid takes significant dot damage. Bosses with resists that aren't wiped out by a curse, would make spell penetration not a pvp only stat. After hearing things like supposedly 4H parry more often and some mobs have higher defense than level*5, I wonder why there isn.t more variety in mobs. It would be interesting to see a boss with resilience in some form.
The tricky bit is balance, no one wants to force someone who wants to PvP to PvE or vise versa. But I don't like the concept of making one aspect nerfed in another. Make them both different paths to the same level and the player can decide how much of each they want to participate in. I would like it so you are not required to do any, but to get a certain level of gear you have to do at least one. Maybe then we can have people win by skill rather than where they got their from.

If access was limited to the most current version/season of the weapons (much like how access is limited to BT/Hyjal) I think the issue would solve itself. People could still obtain the S1/S2 weapons when S3 comes out, which are still an arm and a leg over anything else they can obtain. This way the top, top pvpers obtain the best weapons. Just like the top pvers obtain the best weapons.

I wear 1 piece of BT when I arena- the trash ring. If I had ever seen the lurker ring from SSC drop, I'd wear that instead. Everything else I wear is either Arena gear, Honor rewards, or heroic badge items. The warrior on my team uses a Stormherald, despite having access to Cataclysm's Edge, Torch of the Damned, etc. He might switch when mace spec is nerfed, but for now that's what he uses. Anyone who arenas in blues and low ilvl pve epics shouldn't expect to do well, because they're using shit gear for pvp. Grinding honor in AV doesn't require BT epics to do.

And about BG9... inflated scores don't mean it's harder to get gladiator. There are a lot more teams on BG9 than in most other battlegroups, so while it's definitely harder to be in the top 10 overall or whatever, being in the top .5% doesn't really take that much more effort than elsewhere. This is why something like a 1900 rating requirement for S3 weapons is stupid though... a 1900 rating on battlegroup X could put you in the top 1% of teams, while on battlegroup Y it means you're in the top 5%.

Combining them trivializes PvE content. All they'd need to do to combine them would be take Resilience off the armor, a la Paladin Retribution Season 2 stuff. (Some of the best PvE options for Paladins.) No need to play with other stats. The problem is that walking into Gruul's Lair with t6 epics from PvP kind of...limits your appreciation of the bosses.

Jebralter:

I've run into many teams at my rating with raiding gear, mostly from T5 but its still there. So my personal experience with it is different than yours. Partially this might be because I play more 2s and 3s and not so much 5s where resilience is less important and dps more so. And of course no it is not people solely wearing T6 or T4 or whatever. It is people using the best PVP gear and PVE gear to fill in the rest of those slots. But when someone's pve gear to fill in is T5/6 and the other is crafted/T4, that is quite a bit of a difference.

As for unique weapon bonuses to make them overpowered for PVP, I'd like to think they could get it right and really make weapons overpowered for PVP while at the same time lowering their dps. But considering the wide range of quality in tier set bonuses (warrior 4 piece is godly, shaman 4 piece is crap) I just can't trust Blizzard to be consistent on it. Sure a 10% buff on the healing debuff of MS would be godly for PVP, but would Blizzard really do that because doing that says that any other form of warrior is useless for PVP. Sure we know that is true for the most part, but I can't see Blizzard making item bonuses that favor a specific spec. And I can't see them properly balancing weapon bonuses across classes and specs.

As for the self centered comment, I am very aware at how good S2 items are in comparison to T4 and most T5 gear (although the T5 buffs will help the raiders there). So that doesn't apply to me I'm sorry to say. I only stepped in to this thread when I saw countless people complaining about S2 weapons in T5 content, with no debate on T6 and other raiding items in PVP content. Personally I'm with Deris here. Make PVP rating of some amount a requirement for weapons, or make having 2 piece of the same season a requirement, but really other than that nothing needs to be changed. Blizzard wants a game where the people who do both have the best opportunity to be best at it. A raider doing T6 content plus PVP should have access to more loot to help him in both parts of the game. What I have issue with is taking PVP out of the PVE game while not taking PVE out of PVP, which just leads to pre TBC situations.

Dinadass:

Stormherald and the trash ring are two epics from PVE there. Add in there you play one of the more focused classes in PVP. We've shown that warriors, paladins, mages, etc don't need to gear as much PVP gear. Like the Paladin in the warrior/paladin combo wearing almost pure raiding gear.

[quote=Machinator;475235]Brainstorming a bit, if it doesnt make sense its very late

Much of the problems seem to be that PvE items are good in PvP and and PvP items, like weapons, are good for PvE./QUOTE]

Stream of consciousness-ing just a bit...

Reading the above, I am struggling to wonder how that's a "problem"... a billion pages into this thread.

If you raid, you are less interested in an SSC weapon drop come week 10 of SSC because you already have a decent arena weapon. That said, if the Talon dropped on your first or second kill, you'd be very excited (esp. if your arena work was really point-farming with a team of limited skill and makeup -- review my 5v5 anytime). Note also, that the Talon is a superior PVE weapon to the Merciless Gladiator mainhand, and sure, I'd still like one.

Now, Charsi proposes an interesting fix to make the PVP weapons especially desirable in PVP for a time while making only last season's weapons desirable in PVE. It's an interesting idea. But all it seems to preserve -- and correct me here Charsi -- from a PVE perspective is this:

(1) More excitement over PVE weapon drops in PVE because fewer people have a "tier equivalent" PVP weapon
(2) Less damage / healing from your raid because no one will be sporting a tier-equivalent PVP weapon damage-wise

What it does for PVP is allow the people with the highest points / best rating to get an especially well-powered weapon and still get it sooner than other arena teams -- who might not ever get it with a rating requirement. For PVP, the current system already seems to be working with the possible exception that the best teams run out of gear to buy before the season is over. While I don't object to their being more PVP items, I'm not sure the plight of the arena team that is fully geared is one that needs solving.

Consider that in week 12 of killing Illidan, you are basically gearing the last 2 people in your raid with set pieces (more or less) and clearing a whole instance so that 4-5 people >>might<< walk away with some kind of upgrade. This takes several hours. In week 12 -- or whenever points are relatively valueless -- of arena, you are basically spending 1ish hours in "mano a mano" combat where the encounter mechanics include the unpredictable human element.

I'm a very solid PVE rogue and enjoy doing some raiding. I'm a pretty awful PVP rogue and find the 2v2 and 5v5 time I spend (my semi-real teams) to be far more exciting at this point. I suspect if I were better at PVPing, I'd enjoy the arena ever more because it'd be white knuckle against skilled foes. On the flipside, if I were awful at PVE, I can't imagine raiding being even slightly fun.

There are a lot of things above here people are not entirely happy with, but of all the problems in WoW, this seems so low on the list of things to fix, I don't even get why Blizzard is bothering beyond the Tier 5 weapon buffs. YMMV.

Of course "I like it this way" it gives me an advantage, I would "like it" if I could walk into arena with my full raid gear and be at a huge advantage, it's the selfishness everyone has and I'm not afraid to admit.

You're clearly however ignoring the context of my posts and latching on to arbitrary reasons to disagree. I am posting ideas that would make Arena weapons WORSE in pve, and BETTER in pvp. As a result there wouldn't NEED to be a reason to nerf pve weapons in pvp BECAUSE THEY WOULD ALREADY BE INFERIOR. Read what I'm saying before replying, and try to comprehend it, because your arguments are awful.



gnuoyiy: Do you really need to go around with dictionary definitions to try to say my point is invalid because you think my definition of competition doesn't count? I compete with every other player in the game to be as good as I can compared to them, my guild does the same. Even when a world first is gone, the idea that you can do better in the next race is still competition. Raiding is competitive for some people. Period. You can not call it not competitive because as soon as some people take it as competitive your point is gone.

Secondly, it seems your profile is lying, and you're stretching things. The only level 70 character on armory with the name you give is a dwarf warrior in Eminence on Blackrock, not in Nuclear Launch Detected on Bloodscalp, and if that is indeed you, you have Friendly rep with scale of the sands and Ashtounge Deathsworn, barely in with Scale, that's not representative of a common raider in a Mother Shahraz guild, that doesn't show a dedicated raider.

The truth is that in order to be a fully contributing member of a raiding guild you're expected to have the best items available to you. If a rogue hasn't gotten the drops that are better than season 2 they're expected to have season 2. Come season 3 if there's a rating requirement, that means you have to pvp and pvp well to raid unless you're lucky, which is just as bad as saying you need to raid and raid well to pvp effectively.

2.2 still hasn't arrived and 2.3 is likely months off. Any team pulling in 800-1k pts already has all their gear and if possible, is getting offspec gear they don't need to keep their points from rotting. So if you're on one of these teams, all you're playing for now is fun (which isn't a bad thing, PvP is alot of fun), but "rate of acquisition" is not all that great of a perk for being high rated.

Nor should it be. In fact, nerfing the points advantage you get for being highly rated (or for doing 5x5) would make gaming the system less important and I think make it more fun for all participants, independent of whether or not the items you get are useful in pve. You could also add more rewards, especially consumables, which can only be used in pvp.

Ultimately, I like the concept of arenas, and they definitely add something to pvp which was rather screwed up before TBC. What I find incredibly frustrating is how being successful in arenas is such a big factor for gear progression in both PvP and PvE. In that sense it's not really that much of a better system than the old reputation and honour grinds, and in some ways it's far worse (of all of those, the pure honour grind was probably the best option, because you could get it a number of different ways).

Nerfing the point gain would be lame and I think the nerf that occured midway through s1 was dumb too. The difference between a 2k and 2.3k rating team is only like ~150 points IIRC which really doesn't reflect the effort involved. More items, epic gems, rating req'd crafting recipes, maybe a 10k superweapon, anything that actually consumes points and would be useful to have is the best solution.

I also think the arena is pretty much a resounding success. It is leagues ahead of any of the previous or current PvP honor systems. The weapons are a problem, sure, but that problem is often exaggerated. We've cleared BT and the number of people with arena weapons who wouldn't have been PvP'ing anyway is probably 2 or 3, and the BT gear we're bringing into arenas isn't all that huge of advantages (granted the whole team isn't decked out being partial alts and non-raiders). Personally, I'd rather there not be any crossover at all but crap like the SSC rings show Blizzard disagrees. The rating req. on S3 weapons solves the major hole of the arena giving away free high-quality PvE items, and again, even though I dislike the crossover, I think it fits perfectly into Blizzard's goal of someone who excels at all aspects of the game being the best at all of them.

Actually, yes. This can be a solution. Arena vendor can sell Badges of Season Three worth say 1000 Arena Points, and they can add another vendor selling weapons with T6 level DPS and useful PvP procs, thus making them clearly better, for a low price of 7-20 Badges of Season Three, depending on weapon. This will make these weapons completely out of my reach, and will reward really good PvPers without raising 5k point cap. Next season will invalidate old badges and bring new ones, so it will be impossible to get S4 weapon immediately when the season starts.

I really don't think this would help the situation much. It would just cause raiders to cry even more, because the weapons would still be eventually gotten by the low-ranked teams... just over a longer period of time.

We've already established that many people dislike the idea of weapons of this caliber being available to low-ranked teams at all, and many discount the cost in real time of obtaining them (1500 ranked team takes 2-3 months to obtain a weapon, to the exclusion of other items). Making them more expensive would only increase the amount of time it takes to obtain the weapons, which solves none of the problems presented.

I already said I was wrong when I said raiding wasn't competitive, but the competition doesn't have as large an effect as a team vs. team competition as opposed to team vs. mob.

Ok, Sherlock Holmes. If there is only one gnuoyiy on the U.S. and one gnuoyiy on these forums, it's probably me. I didn't bother to change my guild name on these forums because I don't care what people think? My reputation with BT/Hyjal doesn't show I'm a dedicated raider? Probably because I just started getting raid slots 8 days ago...That doesn't mean I don't know anything about raiding or I probably wouldn't be invited to said raids would I? Maybe if you checked the DKP on our site, you'd see what I've been raiding and when I started...hmmm. I've been raiding consistently for almost 3 years now. I've also been PVPing consistently for 3 years now. Raiding and arena are the only reasons I still play this game, so I think I'd understand both sides of the argument. I think my experience with both aspects of the discussion (PVP and PVE) brings a better viewpoint to it.

The truth is a fully contributing member of a raiding guild will get raid slots regardless of gear if they're good at the game. If that person dislikes PVP, then they don't need to PVP if they do not wish to. If there is no incentive for them to do it then they shouldn't do it. If they cannot acquire the necessary rating, then this will do exactly what you're asking for, won't it? You want PVP weapons to not be necessary for raiders, the rating requirement will do exactly that. It will be nice for the raiders who can obtain them, but it will become unnecessary as people should be aware that some players do not enjoy and cannot perform well in PVP.

As has been said, one slot of gear of an entire character of an entire raid will not make a raid leaps and bounds better...but it will help and give an advantage. The same can be said with raid drops and PVP (rings, trinkets, cloak, neck, bracers, belt, AND weapons, etc.). Now you see, there is more crossover from PVE drops to PVP as listed above when pure DPS is desired after a certain level of resilience(which it is in 5v5), but I won't get into that. These slots of gear will not make your arena team leaps and bounds better, but it will help and give an advantage.