Long post
Next content patch will hit us.
I'm am re-reading the changes from both perspectives (pve and pvp) even if I'm a too casual pvper to judge wisely.

I started a new thread since "in-depth" discussions are quite long and won't surely ease those who are actually interested in evaluating the weight of these changes. I hope you all understand that QQs are quite useless, but we can start discussing about the playstyle changes in both PvP and PvE situations.

I'll try to express my pov on any point from both sides. The changes aren't there yet, nor on PTR so there will be time to fix things that shouldnt work.

A) THE STANCE DANCE COST

Warriors always had to deal with the cap of 10+15 rage in case of stance changes. The mechanic was to dump rage before changing stance.
While a fury warrior can sit in berserk stance doing all he needs, other trees need to dance to reach certain skills that are locked.
When patch 3 was released, battle stance had a sense for arms warriors at least, and while getting 10% less damage was very nice, the counterbalance was really heavy.

PvE side
Arms warriors stand in battle stance, are unable to intercept, interrupt and use whirwind. They anyway gain the ability to rend and use Op, and eventually Tclap. Arms/Fury would swap to Def stance to disarm, intervene or reduce incoming damage, thing that in a raid environment is very situational.
Prot warriors have really no reasons to leave defensive stance while tanking, especially since they got warbringer.
Arms also could swap to berserk stance in the last part of a bossfight to gain 3% crit and use recklessness.
The changes in 3.1 should let us change stance and use WW without losing too much rage. It was doable before 3.08 with Sudden death dumping all rage, so you could Execute then swap without a loss.

We can say warriors don't have many reason to change stance in PvE, new spreadsheets could reveal that using a ww in the "rotation" could be worth, but actually i'm not sure yet.

PvP side
The only viable stance is berserk, battle and defensive are very weak and lack of proper core abilities (read snares/interrupts) so Arms and Prot warriors have to use zerk stance to PvP properly.
While the changes will surely make us able to reattack after a spellreflect, the cost of spells locked out of your actual stance is increased by 20 (10 with TM) while now it has a cost only if you are over 10/25 rage with tm.

Is it more common to be at 40+ rage or under that? I'm asking this to top arena players since I personally think I've never needed to dump rage in a pvp situation, considering shields, heavy armor and all kites we suffer.
If you stand in battle stance and have TM you will need 20 rage to pummel, 25 to reflect, 20 to intercept etc.
So this change will be a buff? I think the counterbalance of not being able to use such spells in a low rage environment is not worth it unless there is a floor of 25 rage like it is now.
Personally i would prefer to see a cap at 50 rage wrather than having to keep always more than 20 rage, since this change will affect every tree: arms -> interrupt/intercept/disarm -- fury -> spellreflect/disarm/tc -- prot -> hamstring/execute.

After a defensive ability is used, warriors then have to spend another 10/20 rage to go back to the offensive stance, increasing the amount of rage the move cost. 45 rage to reflect when you just need 15 nowadays.

B) THE SHIELD THAT GIVES NO RAGE

AT first glance I read this as "When you hit a shielded target you will generate rage", then i realized it is a prot "buff".
Buff only worth in 5men since i don't think the problem of rage starvation for tanks is due to shields, since they never absorb completely the incoming damage from a boss.

PvE Side
Arms and furies won't really see any difference. Prot will gain a few more rage when their shield will absorb damage.

PvP Side
Unless you are playing with a priest there is no difference. If you do, the difference is really negligible.

Don't we need the opposite? IE generate rage on damage DONE against shielded targets?

C) BACK TO TBC BLOOD FRENZY

I just see this as the way to not buff personal dps of arms warriors.

PvE Side
Arms contribution will be higher, personal dps and all physical dps will gain 2% more damage. Nothing to say, it's a good buff, but skews the comparison with fury tree; instead of giving you x% you'll get x% from every other physical damage done. So fury warriors will still have a better personal dps but part of their damage is due to your buff.

PvP Side
Little to no difference

D) THE OP SUNDER ARMOR IN PVP

This change is quite interesting. They said the damage will be the same and they'll reduce creatures armor accordingly.
At first glance I'd say this will buff ArP (if it won't be applied after debuffs) and bosses that actually have 13k armor should be lowered to about 10.8k armor to be roughly equal to what we see now.

PvE Side
ArP will be a better stat (hopefully), Mace spec should become a viable option for arms, but the buff itself loses much of its effectiveness. Their intention is also to make sunder effect less mandatory in a raid environment.

PvP Side
Prot warrior will suffer a damage decrease against all classes, mostly against cloth users. I'm not sure that other warriors would waste 5 gcds to sunder somebody, but well, I am not sure we needed a nerf in damage output tbh.

E) THE DISAPPEARED TALENT FROM BETA

I don't remember why they removed the talent that gave you rage when you parry/dodge. It was also one of the few talents that scaled with gear increases for prot warriors.

PvE Side
If dps warriors could use this talent then they are doing something wrong: they are standing in the wrong place.
It is a prot buff even if the rage starvation during non-trivial bossfights is really something I never saw as an issue.

PvP Side
A small buff since you'll gain some rage, really small if you consider that the rage return won't be very high. Not really something we could struggle for imho.

F) THE BUFFS THEY SHOULD DO

Arms warrior are doing lower damage compared to other melees, especially after patch 3.08 and especially after deep wound double-dip fix.
In the last patch anyway they were saying this and nerfed SD, while they removed TG penality and somehow increased fury dps (even if adding some more rng) with a WW glyph and more chances to proc bloodsurge.

PvE Side
Arms damage is low, they plan to buff OP that relies on RNG and accounts for less than 8% of total damage. Even a 50% increased damage on OP would result in best scenarios to be a 4% dps increase. Will it fill the "gap"?
Slam is the only spell in the game that scales inversely with haste. They also mentioned that haste is been looked at since it's not a great stat in general for physical dmg dealers.

Buffing slam is not a great idea unless they plan to remove the cast time, or make it scale with haste like other spells do. The entity of the buff is still unknown and I don't think I would like to be something like a BM hunter, just using slam on gcd.
Slam is also a move very hard to use in many fights where you have move often so it's not really good to hear they want to buff Arms through OP or Slam.
Some more base damage would also grant arms good scaling, thing that actually is a bit low as many noticed.

PvP side
Little to no use. As for moving fights Slam is very unusual in pvp, unless you are hitting somebody who has no reason to run away. Such cases are prolly under 10% of the situations you see in arena and bgs. Op requires rend to be on target and is really random, I don't think we should rely on it at all considering the penalty of being in battle stance.


CONCLUSIONS

I'm not really happy with these changes, seems to me they just didnt look at warriors.
Cause if they did, well I have to reconsider their skills in game design and balancing.
Nothing is set in stone yet, I still hope they will put a floor on the stance changes, they'll do something for arms in battle stance (like fury with imp zerk) and remove penalties from being in a stance.
IF spells will still be locked I hope for a druid-like mechanic where you just use the spell and you automatically swap stance, at least this will reduce the lag issues when "dancing".

At the end of the day I'm reading these changes as "Sunder armor changed to 4% ArP", nothing more is said about how to buff arms (except few scaring hints), nothing more is said about stance penalities or our lack of mobility and survivability.

What do you guys think? Am I too pessimistic?
Cause I actually play arms even if it's an inferior spec, but I like it. But nowadays fights are trivials and nobody needs you to do fury dps to complete current content.
IF things won't change we'll just have to respec or hope that combat rogues will suck so bad that our blood frenzy will be mandatory again.

Thanks for the time spent reading and sorry for my poor english.

If you are referring to "We are also looking at granting rage when the warrior blocks, dodges or parries. ", I think you may be reading that line wrongly.

You are perhaps a little pessimistic? I have no PvP perspective to offer but in terms of PvE..

Yes, hitting a shielded target would ideally grant us Rage, it's a strange mechanic that makes Warriors (and only Warriors) lose out if the target shields. Rogues, Druids, Paladins and DKs suffer no lowering of damage output just because the target is shielded. Having said that, there are very few PvE fights where it's an issue - I can't think of any raid content (unless you're hitting the wrong drake when you should be going through a portal....,) and even in 5-mans only Ichoron and UP spring to mind...

Blood Frenzy being buffed to 4% would be nice for Arms ... except it's a complete violation of everything Blizzard has said about trying to avoid 'unique raid buffs' and aspiring to a 'bring the player not the class' situation for raiding. I predict either Combat Rogues will get the same increase to 4% or this idea will be shelved. Anyone want to bet 5,000g?

Losing all your Rage when changing stances at low Rage is going to hurt. Sure yay I can retain a close to full Rage if I switch stances as Fury to drop a Rend, or Arms to drop a WW then back to regular programming, but it's outweighed by the fact that I can't reliably switch to Zerk for a quick Pummel on a caster mob as Arms ... I'm often at 10 Rage after SD so wouldn't be able to switch / Pummel even if I have Tactical Mastery. While it's not a huge deal in PvE where you tend to stay in one stance, it's a net utility nerf.

Overpower is important ... it may be ~8% of Arms damage but virtually 100% of Overpowers are going to crit, boosting its effect via Deep Wounds. The fact that it has a 1s GCD as opposed to 1.5s also makes it our highest dps move, even ignoring the low Rage cost. While I agree increasing OP damage won't have a big effect, increasing the chanceof proccing OP could have a surprisingly big effect on our dps (I have suggested on the WoW forums the most elegant way to buff Arms might just be to give Deep Wounds ticks a 10% or so chance to proc OP, in addition to current Rend procs.)

The sunder armor and faerie fire changes increase the worth of ArP over strength for fury at least, making it stackable and scalable at an increasing rate. It works the same as in TBC now, since every boss has the same armor. 16 Pen rating reduces 109 armor off of a 10531 armor boss. Which is the "equilibrium" armor level I speculate they will reduce it to to compensate for the change.

Essentially this is a DPS increase for BIS (best in slot) users because they can take the best items and then stack ArP gems. You can also pop into Arms stance and be able to hit improved rend in between skill cooldowns for a 2-4% overall dps contribution.

I have to disagree. Shields can absorb a big chunk of the incoming damage on raid trash depending on your avoidance and if you have Shield Block up (and some bosses like Loatheb that hit like a wet noodle). This is a really really welcome change for us Prot Warriors and definitely not just for 5 mans.

There are those Death Knight riders in the DK wing of Naxx that can and will use a self buff to absorb all damage until it's dispelled. Tanking them while you are hurting for rage is just terrible (and it annoys DPS Warriors just as much).

Ferals also should not gain rage on absorbs since they share the mechanics with us, but they usually hit harder with the auto attack anyway.

I think it's important to think outside the class box here, warriors don't exist in a vacuum.

The blood frenzy (and corresponding savage combat) changes are an across the board buff to physical DPS. Coupled with the review of armour (reduction abilities and probably penetration stat), I see that as a clear boost. Both arms warriors and combat rogues have been seen as sub-optimal dps so far, I would expect them to be brought in line with the pack with these and future changes.

Shield absorbed damage generating rage for tanks is a buff to healers (esp. Discipline Priests) hidden in a warrior patch note. Disc is looking increasingly viable and this change reinforces that. Part of making healing more interesting and challenging is mixing different mechanics, shields are one of those but having warriors complain when they get shielded on a pull holds that back.

Gaining rage on avoidance looks to be part of a set of changes targeted at tank scaling issues. You'll have seen druids getting a pseudo blocking ability, there are potentially similar changes to DKs unbreakable armor (if I'm reading that right). There is clearly a lot of detail missing here, I just think the fact that they are addressing tank scaling is a positive signal, now rather than later when gear escalation starts breaking things.

Overall I think these are positive steps. I'm sure there will be more changes in the pipeline, and that if there are any real nerfs that they won't be announced until later.

Thanks everyone for the replies firstly.

@Heisenberg
Why am I reading wrong? The first thing that popped in my mind is that prot talent that we saw in beta, but to help everyone (dps and tanks) it may be put as a baseline ability. If it's not something like this please explain.

@Brgid
I would be more than happy to see an increase proc rate, but it can go easily out of control especially considering its cd of 1 second. The problem with that is that after you get 50% crit OP gains pretty nothing from additional crit, unless you get up to 75% and loose a point in imp Overpower. But then, where would you put that talent?
So I hope really to see less RNG in general and see those buffs they promise to arms since the end of beta.

@Liar
When I was writing I was indeed thinking about your post, and I understand this change would be a boost even if not a big one.

About using WW as arms, do any of you see any chance we could insert that in our priority list?
It would be a bit expensive in therms of rage, since should be 10+25+10, but these days I'm often finding myself full of rage and unable to dump it.
Anyway if we would ever use it, we would skip a slam or even 2, so we probably have first to see what's the buff on Slam if there will be any.

I've never had an issue with lacking rage when shielded cause usually on trash I have more than one mob on me so shields deplete in 2 hits, on the other hand I never roll with a disc priest. Still see it as a pretty inconsequential change, unless it applies the other way around aswell.

These warrior changes are a bit bleh, obviously they haven't released everything but I expect them to release the best changes now to get some hype up and then maybe some nerfs later down the road.
The stance change is a pretty huge nerf to PvP ability and just solo PvP. You'll have to compensate and keep a stockpile of rage now "just in case". It'll just be really awkward after 4 years of having a pretty solid mechanic.

Rogues will get the blood frenzy equivalent too so don't really see that much as a warrior change as frost mages getting replenishment as a huge mage change.

Sunder armor is a bit silly aswell. In old content it'll be a pretty big nerf, in current content it'll be unchanged according to them cause they'll compensate. In PvP however it's a pretty huge nerf atleast for Prot warriors who didn't really need a PvP nerf. 20% is pretty crappy aswell. I realize it'll make it easier for Blizzard to balance and make new content with a % armor debuff but 20% is really low in areas like PvP, it should be closer to 40% so casters still aren't hurt much by it but warriors get a better shot at high armored targets.

Hellord, you seem to be suggesting that we will gain rage when the target blocks, dodges or parries however the blue post said

I apologize, I just was too tired when I posted this and somehow reverted the roles
The talent in beta (I don't actually remember the name) was indeed when YOU avoid and not when it's avoided.

I'll edit it.

From a PvP perspective.

Stance Change- This is a fairly massive nerf in nearly all PvP situations except when you're being focus fired or perhaps on a purge based cleave 5's team. Other than that, its really going to hurt, not help, and by hurt, I mean its going to amplify the current rage on shield issues even more.

Shields vs Rage- Does absolutely nothing for our biggest problem in PvP. At this point, with even more new shields going in the game (Bears, DKs ect), rage looks like its going to be harder than ever to get in PvP. The mechanic change was nice for PvE but completely neutral for PvP except in some very rare cases.

Sunder- This is a straight up nerf against most comps, and its a big one. Being so heavily reliant on physical damage, sunder was one of our few trump cards vs the multiple other melee who deal 30-40% of their damage via magic. Now, the only case where sunder will be anywhere close to where it was before is against a holy paladin or feral bear druid.

the sunder change will just be a flat-out physical dps nerf, and their reasoning for it is puzzling at best. nerfing it to become a % will not make it "less mandatory", as any good raider knows that raid buffs and debuffs are the real key to dps. Warrior tanks will still be putting up sunders, and when they're not around, DPS warriors will keep putting up sunders. arpen from gear getting a buff will be the difference maker though.

They said they will adjust mob armor so that there is no difference between a fully debuffed mob now and in 3.1. So exactly how is that a nerf when it makes ArP better and makes target swapping on any non-debuffed mob higher DPS than if you would do it now?

We cant say it's a physical dps nerf unless they realease/we test the changed armor values.
Actually is only a warrior utility nerf since even being mandatory reduces its value in non min-max raid. This should be to ease those small guilds doing 10 men content where sometimes there isnt a warrior/rogue or a hunter with that buff.

The buff to ArP, supposing the damage stays the same, will be by a factor of 1.3 so 30% more worth at first glance, but we still don't know if Ulduar armor classes will have higher armor values.
In the recent past (TBC) armor values from tier 4 and tier 6 diminished. What they plan for the future is unknown.

I understand they don't want to buff more our bleeds, since it would be counterproductive vs arp gearing.
Anyway Slam is not the one to buff.
It's damage is (250 + WD) - WD*0.5/hasted swing speed that means it becomes WORSE with haste buffs/gear. This doesnt make sense if you consider our only use for haste is to slightly increase proc chances of SD.
There is no synergy in these talents and to make it slightly better slam should get haste bonus first.
Overpower is a very nice ability even with no scaling over 50% crit (that many warriors are already experiencing in current content) and gimmick fights like Loatheb would give no bonus on that.

But I really wonder how much they plan to give us in therms of dmg%. We need 3-4% increase or maybe something over 5%? Cause the reverted BF will surely increase the disparity between our dps and other physical dpsrs, skewing it into raid dps.
If they fix combat rogues arms are screwed

Why does everyone seem so sure that ArP will be additive with the new sunder? Isn't it just as likely to be multiplicative(Armor = Armor*.75*(1-ArP%)), since that would maintain the current value of ArP? If they want to improve ArP I doubt they'd use such a crude method, I'd expect them to just alter the rating a little bit.

The only reason I can see for them to improve stacking with sunder is to buff ArP in PvE without buffing PvP as much.

If I recall correctly Blizzard has stated that they want to improve stats, such as Armor Penetration, which aren't particularly valuable. Making ArP additive with Sunder increases its value, but not to the point where it overpowers other stats. It's also more intuitive than the multiplicative situation. If anything, the additive mechanic is an elegant solution, should it be used.

I've been trying to type up a detailed outline of what I think are all the issues that make warriors so frustrating in pvp but it's really hard to not make it sound like I'm just venting. I could go on for pages and pages but it probably would be useless since I get the feeling that I wouldn't be adding anything, I mean most of this stuff is clear as day to anyone that has actually attempted to play a warrior in a battleground or an arena and isn't just looking at a spreadsheet.

Here's my attempt at making it as short as I can without going into an endless rage fueled rant.

• Weapon swaps.
  
  Requiring different weapons for different abilities is very cumbersome and adds a lot of unnecessary delay to actions like spell reflect or shield wall that we should be able to perform reactively. Having to use different macros and waiting for 2 global cooldowns and resetting our auto attack twice is very disrupting to the flow of play and really feels like a hurdle. This is without even bringing stances into the argument, which I accept and embrace as being a core part of the class. I feel that spell reflect and shield wall should not require a shield.
  
  I would also appreciate it if the whole mechanic of switching weapons/shields in combat was looked at and perhaps reworked/rethought. I enjoy being able to offtank in a pinch or turtle up if I am overwhelmed but there are many rough edges that need attention and warriors are perhaps the only class that regularly has to deal with them.
  
  
• Twitch abilities should be useable in all stances.
  
  I'm thinking of Spell Reflect and Pummel. Berserker Rage not requiring a stance has been a very welcome and positive addition, even though the intent of the change was clearly directed at helping tanks avoid fears. Again, this is about making the warrior class feel more responsive and less cumbersome. Making a macro to swap stance and pummel, or to swap weapon and shield bash, is something that should not be necessary, especially because the expected results of these actions can vary so much depending on latency since the client prevents the second command before the first one has registered. If pummel is changed Shield bash can just be removed, I don't think anyone will miss it besides prot warriors wanting to daze stuff but that is a small price to pay.
  
  Besides this, I don't think we need more abilities usable in all stances, I think we need less. Stances need to feel more unique and have a distinct set of tools, most skills should either be usable in a single stance or not require one. This would go a long way in cleaning up a lot of inconsistencies and the current mess of trying to come up with hotbars and keybinds that actually make sense.
  
  
• Rage generation.
  
  This is the "rage on absorb" issue everyone complains about. There are regularly arena games where I am unable to perform ANY action besides bloodrage+hamstring or bloodrage+intercept for a very long duration of time (up to a minute or more). Sometimes my partner will die before I am actually able to generate rage, something I have absolutely no control over and I am powerless against. This is the real source of frustration: it's not that my attacks are negated or my DPS is too low, it's the complete loss of control. I will charge a shielded mage, gain 15 rage, he'll often start casting polymorph or any other spell and I can either hamstring and be unable to pummel, or pummel and then let him walk away because I'm snared and he's not. No rage, no control, no decisions to take that can affect the outcome.
  
  I don't think absorbs are the problem here though, the real issue is deeply rooted in the core of the rage system, rage being tied to damage is flawed. If my target has 99-100% damage reduction and I'm hitting for single digits (Ichoron in VH, Horses in Nax) I'm unable to generate any rage, or threat, or perform any action at all. On the opposite end, if I have a big damage multiplier and raid buffs (Thaddius, Malygos) suddenly I'm getting a full rage bar on every crit and I get more than I could ever spend. This is also the underlying problem that affects warrior scaling. At very low gear levels there barely is enough rage to keep MS/BT on cooldown and do other stuff as well, as gear improves, damage improves, as damage improves we get more rage and perform more attacks. This prevents warriors from scaling linearly and is a big part of why they are so hard to balance and regularly end up being wimpy in bad gear and overpowered in the later tiers.
  
  Rage should not be tied to damage dealt. If a warrior is hitting something, he should be getting the same amount of rage regardless of the fact that he is using a grey dagger or dual wielding Ashbringers. It can still be tied to weapon speed and scale positively with hit/crit/expertise/haste, but basically if weapon swings are landing, rage should be going up at a fairly predictable pace regardless of damage multipliers or reductions or absorbs. Some randomness can still be built in, I'm not asking for rage to be energy.
  
  As an alternative, how about an ability that gives us rage when anyone in our party within X yards is getting hit?
  
  
• Mobility.
  
  AKA Hamstring is too weak. Long gone are the times of it being the best snare in the game, it was spammable, nobody could remove it and abilities to escape melee range once hamstringed were few and could be countered with an intercept. Nowadays there are just so many counters and so many snares that are either much stronger or easier to apply (or both) that it's simply overwhelming. Any team with a Mage or Rogue or a Hunter is able to easily lock us down and outmaneuver us due to ablities like Crippling Poison, Slow, Ice Armor, Frostbite, Frost Trap, Entrapment. Warriors desperately need a stronger slow and/or an easier way to apply it without spending 30% of our GCDs and our rage. Something like Glyph of Hamstring increasing the effect by 20% instead of the RNG immobilize, or some random ability (MS? Overpower? Rend?) auto applying or refreshing Hamstring. How about an Arms talent that gives an automatic 50-60% slow to bleeding targets? It can easily be tacked onto Trauma. Also changing the Improved Hamstring talent that everybody hates into something that makes Hamstring unable to be dodged/parried/blocked. Even just one of these changes would go a long way towards helping us actually stay on target.

I guess this post turned into: "Things I wished were in the 3.1 announcements but weren't". Oh well, probably my first infraction.

So if I'm in battle stance and have 10-19 rage, I can't pummel. Am I reading this correctly?

The only reasons for prot warrior stance-dancing (while tanking) I can think of, is to use Retaliation for a bit of extra AoE threat, and perhaps even Recklessness if trying to build up extra threat in a situation where incoming damage is negligible (OT-ing, most likely). I'm not convinced that it's worth the cost in gcd's though.

I can think of a few - VERY few - times where I ended up stance dancing while tanking for Intercept because charge and intervene were still on cooldown and I really had to be somewhere. With the 30 yard range on taunt, I can't see myself ever doing so again in a PVE situation.

Correct, the swap to Berserker Stance would leave you with too little rage to pummel. You also wont be able to Intercept at that level of rage, nor will you be able to go from B-stance to Arms/Dstance and instantly spell reflect.

This change is an across the board nerf to Warrior PvP and is substantially worse than the current system. In PvP rage starvation is a major issue and you're forced to make due with very small pools of rage to accomplish a wide range of tasks.

Rage loss for swapping stances is an outdated mechanic and needs to be eliminated completely, not clumsily reworked.

The stance change is a massive pvp nerf. To the post a few posts up, if you have 10-19 rage in battle stance, and swap to berserker to pummel, you'll lose 10 rage(assuming maxed tactical mastery), leaving you at 0-9 rage and unable to pummel.

Fury has become the standard warrior pvp spec for a variety of reasons, but the one issue I wanted to point out is that due to it having fewer overall intercepts available compared to arms, as well as furious attacks being unreliable and completely blocked by absorb shields, makes the playstyle very "tunnel-visiony". You can still switch targets sure, but the price is much higher than it was traditionally for arms, a spec that had frequent target switches as a gameplay staple.

Now, this 3.1 stance-switching change encourages a similar playstyle to fury, for any spec, that is, sit in one stance and accumulate rage. But this really helps to illustrate the identity crisis that the arms tree has had for a while now. You can't just sit in battle stance, because you don't have intercept, and you don't have a practical interrupt. But wait - they've admitted arms damage is too low, and they are looking to buff it through slam or overpower. Overpower requires battle stance, and the stance swap change now vastly increases the cost of swapping quickly to battle to overpower and then back to berserker. Slam is extremely difficult to land on moving targets, so any slam buffs that don't change the core cast time mechanic of it will have very little impact on arms pvp.

Warriors have always had a fairly limited set of tools to work with, and making the most out of all of them required frequent stance swaps at sub 25 rage to avoid throwing away too much rage. But now the stance change heavily penalizes that, On paper, it might be easy to say "Oh, well it will just require a playstyle change", but right now the class has some aspects of it that clash with each other too much for that to really play out as simply requiring a playstyle change.