Warrior PvP Thread - Page 22

Roflobster · 10/17/07, 5:07 PM

I don't even have 300 resilience, and I used to wear 4/5 Merciless for the bonus and the rest PVE gear. I had 215 resil but 1800 ap, 33 crit and passive haste/armor ignore, and didn't die!

Bula · 10/17/07, 5:22 PM

Originally Posted by Roflobster

I don't even have 300 resilience, and I used to wear 4/5 Merciless for the bonus and the rest PVE gear. I had 215 resil but 1800 ap, 33 crit and passive haste/armor ignore, and didn't die!

I'd generally agree depending on your team, your healers abilities, and your trust in them. PVE gear when you're beating on a healer in a 2v2 setting is a godsend and so is the 4 piece armor bonus.

Currently I'd say t4 < hwl set < t5 < s1 < s2 < hyjal/bt/t6 gear.

Hopefully the combination of the new badge gear, offset epics, and armorpen added onto s3 gear bring s3 above the t6 level in effectiveness. Which I believe it will.

• Encross · 10/18/07, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by Nethris

Hmm, I find it interesting that 33/28 hasn't come up in this discussion, do people really prefer 4% additional melee damage and using overpower over 3/5 flurry? I find that the only dodges that affect me a ton in PvP are dodges of MS, and overpower doesn't fix that, so I tend to not get imp overpower or tac mastery at all anymore... I occasionally miss being able to macro off a spell reflect, but I've found just switching to defensive stance while keeping my 2h on is generally sufficient to keep me alive and doesn't own my dps like a 1h/shield combo does, and recovering rage when I'm being focused is not a problem.

Now, with the new usefulness of disarm I guess that's a bonus for tactical mastery... But I'm thinking my current spec just using the talent position changes to drop SS (which if it still requires battle stance will be a sore thumb in the fury tree and a pain to use...) for the last point of commanding presence, and take the 4 expertise = 1.0% reduction to dodge and to parry from weapon mastery and the 50% disarm length reduction as good enough to take to get to flurry... so I'm thinking this spec layout is what I'm going with.

Mainly I'm having a hard time figuring how tac mastery helps with either of the situations I usually see in the arena, namely the rage management game to keep MS up, use hamstring/piercing howl/intercept to stay on the target, pummel, and convert any surplus rage to a little dps with WW/HS while I'm not being attacked, and the survival tactic of switching to defensive stance, using thunderclap, demo shout, and piercing howl to lower incoming damage and stay on the target, and keeping MS up as much as possible, throwing cleaves in on practically every swing cause my rage bar is full.

Even in 2v2 where you almost have to keep fully dpsing even when targeted, or 3v3 with 2 healers, is there that much of a reason to be able to switch stances and use overpower in arena? Other than maybe taking imp thunderclap for survival, or taking imp hamstring, I really don't see the patch changing my spec much, or why tac mastery is that helpful in a pure arena spec (in a hybrid spec, yeah, but I tank in raids so I'm respeccing for arena every weekend anyway).

The one thing that has tempted me is a 41/20 spec for max MS damage, high rage gen, and being able to keep MS up without gaps (or at least really close) even if one doesn't hit... but I'm really not sure the drop in white damage would be worth it, especially since the S3 weapons are just a stat boost and swing rate increase over my Stormherald (somewhat sad that the S3 mace doesn't look near as cool as the sword does :P).

I'm curious to know what some reasons are people like tac mastery enough to give up the points in the arms or fury tree. Also, if I'm mainly focusing on my usual 5v5 group of pally/priest healing, warr(me)/ele shaman/rogue dps, and the rogue is going maces, do warr mace procs and rogue mace procs put DRs on each other (I assume yes), and would this make swords a better spec for me in that group? (Yeah, the group makeup isn't exactly optimal imo as our CC blows :P)

It really boils down to a matter of preferance and how much of a target you present for yourself.

33/28 -will- put out more damage over time. With bloodlust you can roll with a 45% IAS; that isn't a joke. But, as is the case with every spec decision, not being able to instantly disarm/spell reflect/whirlwind/avoid losing all of your rage when you swap stances really burns in a lot of situations.

I know that I spend half of my matches alternating battle/defensive stances as much as I do gritting my teeth during 10 second cc-free DPS windows. I can't count the number of times that I've blessed my spec for reflecting a polymorph, or landing a disarm on a Rogue who got cocky and threw on his mongoose OH.

The best comparison I can offer is against Mage/Rogue/Priest. I run with Warlock/Warrior/Druid(or paladin depending) and M/R/P is difficult with either of our set-ups, albeit being a little easier with the paladin. When I'm running with my druid, I get 10-12 second windows of CC-free damage time to disarm, pummel, or get MS on the rogue. In these situations I swear by 35/23/3 as being the better spec. You just don't get the damage time to make use of the 15% IAS versus being able to provide support to your focused Warlock. Mind you, this is a preferance. I'm sure it could be argued that the 15% IAS would allow you to land an extra attack during your short span of DPS time.

Zorac · 10/18/07, 8:40 PM

Originally Posted by Angeron

Having not seen much discussion of Meta gem/boot enchants and the various combo options availible

Could be because its a given. You can basically choose between not having run speed increase (which really gimps you when trying to catch up to healers who runs around corners) and having either 24 ap + 9 stm or 12 crit + 10 hit. I prefer more crit and hit, even if im at the hit cap vs most targets its always nice not to miss that ms vs that annoying frostmage once you do actually catch up to him.

And about how much resilience is needed its just as you said, it differs greatly depending on the matchup. I generally run with 300 or 360. 300 or lower Is for 5on5 where we have several annyoing targets like warlock rogue and resto druid who always tend to get focused, so im not really worried about resilience in 5on5, only reason I dont wear full pve is that I dont have t6 gear yet and I like the 4 set bonus.

For 2on2 and 3on3 though Im a much more likely target, so I tend to run with 360 or 370 resilience. However this is really annoying when faced with the task of killing a paladin.

soujeh · 10/20/07, 6:44 AM

Originally Posted by Zorac

Could be because its a given. You can basically choose between not having run speed increase (which really gimps you when trying to catch up to healers who runs around corners) and having either 24 ap + 9 stm or 12 crit + 10 hit. I prefer more crit and hit, even if im at the hit cap vs most targets its always nice not to miss that ms vs that annoying frostmage once you do actually catch up to him.

And about how much resilience is needed its just as you said, it differs greatly depending on the matchup. I generally run with 300 or 360. 300 or lower Is for 5on5 where we have several annyoing targets like warlock rogue and resto druid who always tend to get focused, so im not really worried about resilience in 5on5, only reason I dont wear full pve is that I dont have t6 gear yet and I like the 4 set bonus.

For 2on2 and 3on3 though Im a much more likely target, so I tend to run with 360 or 370 resilience. However this is really annoying when faced with the task of killing a paladin.

I heard Zorac is a gnome rl.

On a more serious note this is something you just gotta figure out yourself and get a feel of. The need for resilience as a warrior depends so much on so many variables, most importantly what battlegroup (what setups you mostly meet and how they play) and what rating you are at. That said I usually go high resi in 5v5 since it's oh-so-popular for 4DPS to go for warrior, at least vs 2345.

So, two questions; can anyone confirm that Expertise works in PvP ? I've seen many theories on the old +weapon skill, not sure what works for PvP and what doesn't.
Also, has anyone done/seen any tests on mace spec proc rate in 2.3 ?

Roflobster · 10/20/07, 1:36 PM

Originally Posted by soujeh

Also, has anyone done/seen any tests on mace spec proc rate in 2.3 ?

WoW Forums -> 2.3 Mace Spec proc rate % over 11000+ attacks

So I will still be maces.

soujeh · 10/21/07, 1:22 PM

Originally Posted by Roflobster

WoW Forums -> 2.3 Mace Spec proc rate % over 11000+ attacks

So I will still be maces.

Thanks. Obviously the better choice in 2.3 too. But I feel like trying swords

Uziel · 10/21/07, 8:11 PM

I tried searching through the PVP forums, but I could not find any math related to armor penetration versus attack power/crit.

Does anyone know which is more beneficial to stack? I plan on getting as much of the season 3 gear as I can, however I am unsure when it comes to an enchant (ie, executioner versus savagery).

News · 10/29/07, 6:17 AM

Gentlemen, thanks for the information so far.

Some advice please,. I am nearly 70 with my warrior, do you think its worthwhile me grinding out 375 in smithing (currently 0) & craft a deep thunder..or, take an S1 mace while I grind out honor for the veterans plate & some S1 gear, eventually getting S2, S2 kit

thanks in advance

Grailyn · 10/29/07, 10:46 AM

Depends entirely on how much free time and money you have laying around. DT is better than the S1 mace, but the S1 mace is FAR FAR easier to get.

Weather it's worth the extra time and effort is up to you. It's not a huge difference in effectiveness for what to me is a huge difference in effort to obtain.

Either way your likely to replace either of them once you get really serious so I would recommend just picking up the S1 mace then saving up for the S3 version once you have the rest of your gear in order.

Humbaba · 10/29/07, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by News

Gentlemen, thanks for the information so far.

Some advice please,. I am nearly 70 with my warrior, do you think its worthwhile me grinding out 375 in smithing (currently 0) & craft a deep thunder..or, take an S1 mace while I grind out honor for the veterans plate & some S1 gear, eventually getting S2, S2 kit

thanks in advance

At this time I'd say it's not worth it unless you have a lot of time and a lot of gold and you can get the vortices for a Stormherald. You're better off getting a season 1 mace with honor and then getting a season 3 mace when you have enough points saved.

News · 10/29/07, 3:32 PM

Thanks for the advice, I thought as much.

Rej · 10/30/07, 9:53 PM

What is the general consensus on the mace spec nerf? From the sound of it, it didn't really make much of a difference?

One of our warriors is seriously considering making the jump to mace spec for the stun procs. Without a Stormherald, would it be worth it with just the season 2 mace?

Grailyn · 10/31/07, 10:44 AM

I use S2 mace over SH right now mainly because I'm a casual.

I have both S2 mace and sword now and did some playing around with sword spec a few weeks ago and at least for me personally it's night and day difference. Sword is nice, a little extra burst once in awhile, but mace spec really changes the game for you. The biggest thing is that it's an entirly new thing you can do, not just doing somethign you can already do a tiny bit better.

Honestly neither one is going to win you that many games all by itself but in my experience a single mace stun procs on average has a far greater impact on a game than a single sword spec proc. Plus I believe that even with the nerf mace proc % will still be much higher than sword.

Rough numbers on the nerf are something like ~11% proc chance going to ~9.4% chance. There are other threads with results from some detailed testing that has been done on PTR.

Rej · 10/31/07, 5:04 PM

Originally Posted by Grailyn

Honestly neither one is going to win you that many games all by itself but in my experience a single mace stun procs on average has a far greater impact on a game than a single sword spec proc. Plus I believe that even with the nerf mace proc % will still be much higher than sword.

This is definitely the sense I've been getting. We've come to really fear SH warriors, and the mace procs come frequently and at the worst times.

Talorn · 10/31/07, 10:54 PM

I have been thinking as I have deep thunder which is roughly a s1 (well maybe s1.5) equivalent weapon with very little chance to upgrade it to stormherald, that I would get the s3 sword (I am quietly confident my 3v3 will make it to 1850, the lock isn't even on vent yet).

However recently, and supported by the above posts, I think that if you take 3 a ideas for arena being "Control", "Burst", and "DPS" then it goes like this

Control > Burst > DPS

Deep thunder even though it will be significantly less dmg than the s3 sword, and even with a nerf on mace spec it will provide "control" in arena meaning its better than the s3 sword?

Also this is why I now think that mongoose > savagery (only just though) as its burst vrs dps here. (However executioner which although is dps would be too good to ignore)

Theres is a question in these ramblings, s3 sword or deep thunder? - I think my main team is gonna be 3v3.

My warriors name is schnooshy btw. I plan to have s3 helm, gloves, ring, neck & maybe bracers on day 1, everything else, s2.

Thanks.

TheCutlery · 10/31/07, 11:42 PM

Originally Posted by Rej

This is definitely the sense I've been getting. We've come to really fear SH warriors, and the mace procs come frequently and at the worst times.

The thing I'm not happy about with mace stun is that it causes me to waste pummels. I'll see a heal going off, and either my MS/WW or auto attack will trigger a mace stun, but I won't have time to react to that and the pummel will still go off. I know it's still an interrupt and that fact is unchanged, but the school lock on a pummel has won me games before, namely times when I've got a load of rage to burn off on a school locked paladin before he can bubble or something of that nature.

I was thinking of picking up a S3 sword too, mostly to play around with. I'm sure it's going to outperform the DT, but if it's enough to overcome mace spec, I dunno.

Humbaba · 11/01/07, 12:23 AM

After thoroughly enjoying mace spec stuns, I'm planning to get the s3 mace as soon as I can. There will be enough high dps swords in ZA to toy with if I want to try sword spec.

• Zak · 11/01/07, 7:54 AM

How does the s3 mace compare to SH? They seem quite close, so does the extra stun proc still give SH the edge?

Grailyn · 11/01/07, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by Zak

How does the s3 mace compare to SH? They seem quite close, so does the extra stun proc still give SH the edge?

S2 mace is roughly = SH. Same DPS, Same iLevel. SH slightly higher top end and the stun proc (very low proc rate ~1PPM). S2 Mace has better pvp stats, mostly because of the resil. Half the teams out there now seem to be warrior gib teams so that is pretty useful.

Overall I would have to give SH an advantage over S2 mace, but S3 mace is just clearly superior to SH IMO.

Thorquiz · 11/02/07, 7:53 AM

Overall I would have to give SH an advantage over S2 mace, but S3 mace is just clearly superior to SH IMO.

Yep. But as a raiding pvp-warrior, I think I'd prefer Torch of the Damned over the S3 mace, mostly because the DPS is equal (because of passive haste on the PvE-mace), but TotD is 3.80 speed hence the mace stun procrate is higher. But I'm not sure, perhaps the resilience-plus is worth the lower proc-rate.

Mem · 11/02/07, 10:42 AM

I'm really on the fence right now, having used a Stormherald for months now I anticipated that the nerf of the spec would harder than it appears to be now. If I want, I can probably get the next torch or edge (only our holy paladins have expressed their interest in it) but I'm really not sure which to choose. We had in our 2:2 several incidents where sword spec proccs did kill my priest very quickly and at least he says that he fears sword warrior more than mace bearers. Another alternative would be to get the pvp mace and regardlessly bid on the next edge in order to have access to both specs.

Oh and hello, Thor

Clockwise · 11/02/07, 2:05 PM

Originally Posted by Zak

How does the s3 mace compare to SH? They seem quite close, so does the extra stun proc still give SH the edge?

Just so we have something hard to look at:

Differences from SH to S3 -

+1 topend damage
+4 Strength
+1 Stamina
+15 hit rating
+.81 crit%
+33 resil
+98 armor penetration
+.2 sec swing timer
-the stun proc (I think elsewhere noted as about a 2% difference in stun proc rates between S3 and SH, due to swing speed differences and loss of the proc)

All in all, I think I'll be picking up the S3 mace (or maybe sword, who knows) once I fill out the 5 set pieces. 2.3 seems to be shaking up a lot of things at the cutting edge of pvp, not least of which is that Mortal Strike now affects Drain Life. A lot of metagame things might change for 2s and 3s if Drain Life isn't the powerhouse it used to be. You might see a surge in the popularity of rogue teams, which may not make maces the best choice anymore. To be sure, the 2h arena weapons are a significant point investment, and you'd want to be sure exactly what you were doing.

Thorquiz · 11/02/07, 2:11 PM

Originally Posted by Clockwise

You might see a surge in the popularity of rogue teams, which may not make maces the best choice anymore.

Uhm, dunno about you, but I'm happy about every mace-stun against a rogue with evasion. Sure, the extra burst of swords against low armor might decide about win or loss, but all in all with the upcoming rogue changes and the already-popular prep/adrenaline rush-spec, I'm definitely going to stick with mace-spec (double evasion annoys like hell).

Clockwise · 11/02/07, 2:12 PM

Hence I said "may". There's been a few things coming up in each arena season that I don't think could have been predicted based on patch notes. The metagame tends to work itself out. Warlocks didn't really come into their own, I don't think, until everyone had enough resilience to make dots a preferred damage dealing method, sometime around late S1. Obviously they were good before, but hopefully you get the gist of my point.