Mulokmar, did you just cut and paste that from the WoW forums?

Not only are you using four different kinds of poisons in your examples (Mind Numbing, Crippling, Deadly for Envenom and Wound), a Warrior complaining that they aren't as good as a Rogue in PvP is clearly delusional.

A trainable shadowstep that doesn't come with the damage bonus modifier and usuable in combat with no stealth requirement would go a long way in improving the mobility issue.

Just give us blink already but rename it to something rogue-like. 0o

I very much agree on this, but you have to remember when this post was initially created, 5v5 was king because both points it rewarded and it's what the "Pros" were playing. They since upped the points in 2v2 and 3v3, and they are upping them again to make them even closer to 5v5 next season (at least according to a Blue post somewhere out there on the interweb).

So I do agree, Rogues no longer have it as bad as we used to. We're still borderline useless in 5v5, but 3v3 and 2v2 we can be very compitent. That doesn't mean we still don't have some issues.

I'll have to check out the new numbers, but in the past there wasn't one bracket where Rogues were in the top half of the representation of the top 100 teams, so there is still room for fixes.

At the risk of getting a warning, you're a fucking idiot. Go back to the WoW Forums, or have a friend read the thread to you so you can comprehend. Good lord.

It's been said multiple times in this thread already, but rogues will never get the tuning they need until everyone can forget that time they got ganked at low health by a rogue in world PvP. Which is never.

Tower it is not that bad with rogues as others have said when not in the 5v5 bracket. Even with 5v5 there is a niche there with a 4 dps team setup. But in 2v2 and 3v3 rogues are very strong and have good setups in both. It is certainly not as dire for them as some rogues would say.

By the looks of it 3v3 is the bracket where Rogues shine. 2v2 and 5v5 is still dominated by Warriors with Warrior/Pally, Warrior/Resto Shaman and Warrior Druid all being represended in the top 10 US 2v2 teams.

That's actually part of the problem. In large-group settings, you've got two relatively long cooldowns to keep you up(Evasion and Vanish) and once those two cooldowns are burned, you're pretty much hosed.

Every class in the game(even paladin) has a means of holding rogues in combat. It's not nearly that simple, and that's not even counting the fact that even if you get out of combat and run away, you're no longer contributing to your team until you reenter the fight.

Rogues can definitely be effective, but your post highlights the exact reason it takes fairly specialized circumstances and team composition.

You can click my armory link, I have solid 2v2 and 3v3 teams, dropped my 5v5. Try setting up a competitive rogue centric 4dps team on a PvE server. Sure, I'd love to run rogue/UA/UA/Spriest/Druid, but is that always an option? No. Do I wish I had the versatility a warrior has in group composition? Uh, yes. This game can continue to be rock paper scissor, but if I can only play with other paper, and the dominant force in 5v5 is rock/paper/scissor teams (2345), then yeah, things need to change. Not every rogue wants to play on a gib team, warriors do fine on gib teams too - it ain't like a rogue is bringing that much more (read posts in this thread)

My 4dps warrior gib team (rolled a mage. we don't play anymore though)
The Armory

Tuning =/= buffing. To tune is to buff in one area, and to balance the positive gain, nerf in another. There are many armory crawlers out there that show how there is very little diversity in rogue weapon choice, build and teammates. That right there screams of a need game balancing.

The top 2v2 team on your server is Warrior/Priest, No 2. is Shadow Priest/Warlock, Warrior/Resto Shaman. Also, your server only has one team over 2000 rating in 2v2, so your server isn't even very good.

So either you are lying, making stuff up, or have an incorrect profile.

EDIT: On further investigation, the top 2v2 team on your server isn't even in the top 200 for your Battlegroup, so we can only guess where the top 2v2 with a Rogue is...500 maybe? It's likely your server doesn't even have a Rogue on a 1900+ rated team.

Isn't the Armory a wonderful thing, top rated 2v2 team with a Rogue on your server has a rating of 1879, for 555th place on the Battlegroup which is considered a weak one at best.

Is my battlegroup (Rampage) unique in that there's still a large number of warrior/paladin/x teams at 2100+ in 3v3? I know that BG9 3v3 is mostly filled with rogue/mage/priest cookie-cutter and achieving a high rating there would be a lot more skill-dependent (mirror-matches) than class-dependent, discounting obvious advantages in mirrors such as racials (fearwardlol). But depending on what types of teams of popular in your battlegroup, I still think 3v3 is plagued with the same issues for rogues as 2v2 and 5v5.

Actually if you look the shadow priest/warlock team has a rogue in it. I guess they dropped to #2 recently because they had a 2048(?) rating this past week. But this past week they were first on the server. Also Im not comparing my server to others ratings because if one battlegroup all they have is shitty teams their general rating may be really high, or really low. You cant compare team ratings between battlegroups only think you can derive from score is bringing the best teams from the server to the top.

No, but you can compare rating to other teams within the Battlegroup, the top teams in your BG are at 2300+, the top Rogue team (one that plays the majority of games for his/her team) on your server is 1879, making it the 555th best team in the entire BG. Please don't use that team as proof for "Rogue are fine, L2P" because it doesn't hold any water.

I based my statement on the fact that if you check out the Top 15 teams in every bracket in the US, the only one where there are equal to or more Rogues than Warriors is 3v3, so it's not like there are no Warriors in 3v3, just quite a few Rogues.

You gotta be kidding me.

First of all, not all 4dps teams have to be Zecks style shadow power stacking, rogue/mage/mage/sham/healingdruid, rogue/spriest/mage/lock/healingsham, rogue/druid/mage/sham/healingpally, i can keep naming different setups, but the point is there are more than 1 viable 4dps setup.

Second, rogue + casters + healer 4dps teams are the paper to 2345's rock.

Third, there are quite a number of reasons why people prefer rogues to warriors for melee in 4dps... wound poison can't be bop'd, less reliance on group synergy/support (well, i guess i'm mostly talking about wf/lust/bof), very strong cooldowns that are perfect for the agressive rushdown style of the 4dps game, much more reliable roots/stuns... did i mention wound poison can't be bop'd?

WoW Forums -> Can I Get a Ruling on This One - Hortus?

Blue post in the PTR forums suggests that they've fixed the issue with rogues effectively losing energy under the new regen mechanics.

Can someone confirm what the current behaviour on the PTR is with regard to energy ticks after openers?

So warriors have great PvP utility and power, and fit a lot of makeups. While rogues have more limited 4dps setups to choose from. The problem is, the ease of playing a warrior in arena directly effects the number of rogues you see in arena, because we are wet paper to their skilheralding scissor action.

And I will call you on the spec choice. Choosing to be resto, elemental or enchancement(kek) is a big decision that changes who you play with and how you play. The rogue class can either do damage (mutilate, combat) or do less damage (lolsubtley), neither choice dictates who we can partner with. Although, arguably specing heavy Subtlety will change who will want play with you ;p

@Kcolraw
Even so, feel free to browse armory on my server. It's VERY PvE centric, 3 Horde guilds in BT, 2 Alliance. We only have 2 Gladiators from Season 1, had 3 Gladiators transfer over during season 2. My 4dps just lost 2 people to quitting (spriest and lock). I know this all sounds like QQ, but it is VERY hard to find top tier players with great arena gear (great is MINIMUM for a good 5v5) and who don't raid 6-7 nights a week. All those people transferring to BG9 aren't just doing it for the competition, with school back in session, summer creating many inactive accounts and the PvP game stagnating, they're transferring to team up with more competitive players. My alt mage (Valrath) at one point had the highest 2v2, 3v3 and 5v5 for an mage on the server - I mean, come on.

I think a lot of the complaining about rogues in 5v5 comes from the current (maybe) metagame and/or a failure to innovate.

I think that the assertion that rogues have less options in 5v5 is just false. Its been brought up that rogues work well in a 4dps set-up (and it is true) when fighting 2345. If 4 dps is paper, and 2345 is rock, then tri-healer is scissor.

There are viable tri-healer set-ups that include rogues. Yes, all things being equal tri-healer suffers a disadvantage when fighting 2345 (in the same way they posses an advantage vs 4dps).

Warriors can work in a 4dps set-up; but a rogue is better. A rogue/warrior, warrior/x, or rogue/x work in tri-dps. By this point we would have to begin comparing x setup to y setup to discuss how exactly rogues/warriors fit in a tri-healer set-up.

I am not asserting that there is zero need for tweaking w/ the rogue class (buffing?). I am however saying that this idea that warriors fit more and perform better in 5v5 (and are therefore better) is just plain false. It took BG9 forever to discover 4dps, and it will probably take them forever to discover tri-healer (for ex: Hex/Slow Roll had 4 dps early S1 and are not on BG9). Eventually BG9's meta-game will mature to reflect the popularity of the 4dps set-up. I certainly believe there is room for improvement in pvp class balance, but I also believe it is light years away from broken; for any class.

I guess millions of players should be taking notes from your BG? That's pretty much what you're saying here. With all your naysaying, where's your supportive evidence? Running 3healer +war/rogue is a horribly crippling setup. BoP negates any ability to burst a target, and unless you're running multiple Holy Priests, you have near 0 mana burn capabilities to run an outlast team. Toss in the fact that rogues are a horrible fragile class to heal over time...

I think we're all implying successful teammate options for 5v5. I think we all know I can zone in with 4 hunters and feel like I'm innovating.

Rogues are very good in 5v5 - you just need a very proper makeup. We run 2.5 healer, with an Ele Shaman, Frost Mage, Holy Paladin, Holy/Disc Priest and Mace Rogue. We're 2200 rated. In a pretty good BG (BG5). Yes it is possible, yes there are times we wish we had a Warrior who was active, yes there are times we are glad we have a rogue.

Rogues are GREAT for shutting down 4dps teams. No single class comes close to ramming a 4DPS team so hard as a rogue. We just look at the team we're fighting, set the dial to "RAM" and win. The teams that give us a hard time are always 2 Warrior/3 Healer, or 2345 with no soft targets (i.e sl lock instead of mage.). Also a Druid can be problematic when coupled with another healer.

Wounding Sucks. Badly. Crippling sucks too. Badly.

But this is all anecdotal, but I happen to like my rogue even if he is a dirty Canadian, and I think we're "innovatingzomg" .

Rogues do need a bit of help, espescially compared to Mace Spec Warriors - just mostly due to how easy it is to remove wounding, how difficult it is to keep up, and how badly rogues get counter-rammed by Warriors. But I think this mostly stems from the fact that Warriors are so insane, and not that Rogues are bad. (yes make mortal strike stacking like sunder up to 5 - 10% per stack. thanks.)

How about adding a level 70 rank of crippling poison? Doesn't the normal rank two act as a level 50 item with resistances?

Yes, make MS an instant attack that stacks, that wouldn't be overpowered at all..

He means stack it multiple times to equal the 50% debuff it is today on one hit.