The Art of War(craft): A Resilient Argument Part II

It is also interesting to note that Resilience is almost exclusively an endgame item property, clearly designed for Arena combat. There are no items with Resilience usable below level 60 other than Elixir of Ironskin, which is usable at Level 55. Aside from token items from the Reinforced Fel Iron Chest in Hellfire Ramparts and uncommon quest rewards in the Outlands, most items with Resilience are usable only at Level 70 -- the level where competitive Arena play begins. The idea behind PvP in today's environment is all about damage mitigation. Last week, I discussed the key talents and a few abilities that classes have access to prior to obtaining Resilience. In the process of accumulating gear with Resilience, it helps to be familiar with the various forms of damage mitigation.
Today, however, we dive right into the juicy part. Resilience is an item property or statistic that reduces the chance you will get hit by a critical strike or spell critical strike; reduces the damage taken from critical strikes and spell critical strikes; and, as of Patch 2.2, also reduces the damage taken from Damage-over-Time effects (DoTs). Each 1% of Resilience will reduce the chance you will be crit by a spell or attack by 1%, reduce damage from crits by 2%, and reduce damage taken from DoTs by 1% (edit: It was erroneously written as 2%. Thanks to Phlipy for pointing it out!). A Resilience Rating of 39.4 grants 1% Resilience at Level 70 and -- as a bit of useless information -- a Resilience Rating of 25 grants 1% Resilience at Level 60. Because of the clear advantages it provides, any player moderately serious about PvP should accumulate Resilience gear.

There is no limit to how much Resilience can reduce an opponent's chance to score a critical strike or how much periodic damage it can mitigate. However, Resilience efficacy is capped at 25% against damage dealt by critical strikes, making 12.5% Resilience or a rating of 492.5 the highest optimal number to aim for when stacking Resilience. Higher Resilience may further reduce crit chance and DoT damage, but each rating point of Resilience beyond 492.5 is only half as effective, making it something of a waste.
Resilience takes up valuable statistical item points, so stacking on Resilience comes at the price of other key stats such as raw Spell Damage or Attack Power. Furthermore, not all classes necessarily need extremely high Resilience... it depends on context. Particularly in Arenas, depending on your Battlegroup's environment per bracket, some classes need more Resilience than others. In the notorious Bloodlust Battlegroup, otherwise known as BG9, Warrior gib is a commonly used strategy in 5v5, particularly with the occasional 4 DPS team. Max Resilience certainly comes in handy in those situations but not so much in Battlegroups where Warriors are ignored in favor of focus firing on conventionally "softer" targets. It also depends on spec -- a Siphon Life / Soul Link (SL/SL) Warlock certainly needs as much Resilience (and Stamina) as he can get.
If, in your experience, you are a high priority target, stack Resilience. Otherwise, it's up to you to find that delicate balance of Resilience and offensive power by choosing your gear carefully. Even a full set of Season 3 Vengeful Gladiator's gear (5/5) will only give +195 Resilience Rating tops (the Vengeful Gladiator's Vindication), so it is necessary to obtain several pieces of PvP non-set epics and other items in order to raise your Resilience. There are also a number of enchants and gems that allow you to customize your gear towards Resilience such as Enchant Chest: Major Resilience, learned from a world drop recipe, and Fire Opals, which drop from various Heroic instances.

Depending on your server or Battlegroup, a certain level of Resilience is desirable. +300 Resilience Rating is a respectable number, although hardcore players will push for or require +400, nearing the optimal cap. While mostly useful in Arena, it's also good for old school World PvP on PvP servers where a healthy amount of Resilience softens the blow of an often unexpected first strike. Generally regarded as a PvP statistic, Resilience also works against mobs and bosses, although there are far better stats that serve this purpose. Defense, for example, works towards making tanks "un-crittable", rendering Resilience obsolete.
A critical situation
At a glance, it's easy to see that Resilience affects critical and spell critical strikes the most. The reduction to DoTs were later added when it became apparent that DoTs scaled too strongly even against high Resilience targets. Because crits are the highest sources of burst damage and were consequently what made pre-TBC PvP short and (bitter)sweet, Resilience changes the PvP landscape to, what some may argue, the disadvantage of crit-dependent class specs. This is true, to a degree. Common sense dictates that stacking on critical and spell critical rating will negate the effect of Resilience -- but only as far as chance to crit is concerned. But Resilience also affects damage taken by crits, which creates further problems.
Casters that rely on crit damage, in particular, suffer a huge blow because spell critical strikes deal 150% of normal damage by default as opposed to 200% for physical attacks. However, there are Talents -- usually high tier -- that increase damage dealt by spell critical strikes such as Elemental Fury for Shamans or Spell Power for Mages. Resilience affects crit-dependent spells and abilities on two fronts by reducing the chance it will crit and, when it does crit, by reducing the damage it deals. Even with a 25% cap on damage reduction, the effect is substantial.
One curious effect of Resilience is that it checks if a spell or attack crits before converting it into a normal strike. As noted in Patch 2.0.7, effects that benefit a character when hit by a crit will still trigger even if Resilience converted the attack from a critical strike to a normal strike. This includes abilities such as a Paladin's Eye for an Eye or a Warrior's Blood Craze. On the other hand, the reverse does not hold true. Effects that require a critical strike, such as Vengeance, will not trigger if the attack does not end as a crit.
Figures and hypothetical calculations are over at WoWwiki, should you be interested in going over the numbers. Suffice it to say that Resilience has a greater effect on the average damage dealt by a high crit opponent than one whose focus is more on pure spell damage or attack power. When building or gearing towards PvP, there is a balance to be struck between Resilience and your ability to deal damage. Having massive amounts of Resilience and Stamina is pretty much useless if you have the offensive power of a gadfly.
Some have pointed out how complications also arise with Warriors, whose ability to generate Rage relies highly on critical strikes and damage dealt, as well as damage taken. Because Warriors generate Rage in proportion to the damage they deal or take, Resilience has an adverse effect whether the opponent or the Warrior has high Resilience. When fighting high Resilience targets, Warriors generate considerably less Rage, not scaling in the same manner as a Mage's mana or a Rogue's energy.
Despite the seeming flaws that Resilience has, there is little question that the mechanic has been good for PvP overall. Lengthier battles are always a good thing, and clearly dichotomizing endgame PvP versus engame PvE is a welcome change. It is important to delineate the two because they are separate endeavors. Yes, they both require time and effort, but -- despite what anybody says -- I don't believe one is greater than the other. Welfare epics or not, I believe PvP takes as much commitment as raiding if you want to excel. Resilience is the defining stat that makes endgame PvP distinct. Endgame PvP is defined and dictated by your Resilience.
PvE to PvP
It is rather obvious where to obtain items that are heavy with Resilience. With the introduction of Arena Season 3, items with Resilience became widely available as Arena Season 1 items became available for purchase with Honor. There are PvP items with Resilience for almost every item slot that can be purchased with Honor or Arena points. With enough gear and the proper gems or enchants, it is fairly easy to stack over 300 or even 400 Resilience. Reaching the magical figure of 492.5, however, requires a serious focus, such as using Mystic Lionseye in more than a few sockets.
That said, is PvP the only way to obtain Resilience gear? Most certainly not. Blizzard has repeatedly expressed their intention to have PvP players experience PvE content, resulting in several excellent items with Resilience obtainable only through PvE. If you're not too keen on wading into the battlefields with zero Resilience, there are a few options that allow you to start accumulating Resilience gear without getting (other players') blood on your hands.
Most of the gems mentioned in the table above are drops from Heroic instances, while the Lionseye from which Mystic Lionseye is cut only drops from The Black Temple. The earliest Resilience gear available, the Mok'Nathal Clan Ring and Mok'Nathal Wildercloak are drops from Hellfire Ramparts. Spirit Shards from Auchindoun instances allow you to purchase the Exorcist items, such as the Band and Seal of the Exorcist, as well as the various helms which also have Meta sockets. Runed Fungalcap from the Slave Pens is a low-level item but gives a high amount of Resilience, just 4 rating points below the highest Resilience trinkets in the game, the Talismans of the Alliance and Horde. The Alembic of Infernal Power is another trinket with high Resilience, dropped by The Black Stalker in Heroic Underbog -- Coilfang Reservoir seems rife with Resilience gear.
Speaking of Coilfang Reservoir, Hydross the Unstable and Morogrim Tidewalker from Serpentshrine Cavern drop Band of Vile Aggression and Band of the Vigilant, respectively. Not to be outdone, even the big fish Lurker Below drops The Seal of Danzalar. Who says PvE doesn't gear you up for PvP? The timed event in Zul'Aman also awards what is currently the highest Resilience ring in the game -- the Signet of Eternal Life. While you're out accumulating Badges of Justice from Zul'Aman, you can look dreamily towards the gear G'eras is hawking, such as Dory's Embrace, which was featured in our Phat Loot Friday. The enterprising Naaru also sells cloaks for casters such as the Cloak of Subjugated Power and Kharmaa's Shroud of Hope, the latter being the only healing cloak with Resilience. If I didn't know any better, it seems like Blizzard is forcing PvP players to PvE!
There are also a number of Resilience items which can be crafted by a profession, such as the Unyielding Girdle, made by tailors; or the Helm of the Stalwart Defender, forged by blacksmiths. Granted, the helm is an odd piece of tanking gear (and consequently useless in PvP), but there are quite a few good Resilience items obtainable through crafting. Another odd item is Timelapse Shard, which required Exalted reputation with the Keepers of Time -- it has Resilience, a PvP-centric stat, but also reduces threat, a PvE mechanic. While you're grinding your reputation with the mysterious Keepers, of course, feel free to pick up Reaver of the Infinites -- arguably the best blue 2-handed weapon for PvP -- from Epoch Hunter or Tarren Mill Vitality Locket from Captain Skarloc, both in Old Hillsbrad.
As you can see, there are more than a few options available to players reluctant to PvP in order to accumulate Resilience gear. For those who wish to challenge themselves, a long quest chain that culminates in the Arcatraz rewards Resilience neckpieces. There are still more PvE-obtained items with Resilience, making it possible to start the PvP grind with a modicum of Resilience. It will be a minor amount to begin with, surely, but it should be enough to set you off in the right direction. Whatever you might think about Resilience, it is a game mechanic that is here to stay. If you're looking into engaging in endgame PvP, stacking on Resilience should be one of your primary goals. The more Resilience you have, the longer you'll be able to stick around to enjoy your PvP.
Zach Yonzon writes weekly PvP column The Art of War(craft) in between cleaning up his daughter Zoe's soiled nappies and cradling her to sleep. His Resilience works very well against damage dealt by baby poo.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, PvP, Guides, The Art of War(craft) (PvP)
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 2 of 5)
Zach Jan 29th 2008 11:27AM
By the way, I don't think I've ever written an article about how well-balanced Warlocks are. I don't write the Arena column nor the Warlock column. You might be mistaking me for another writer on the site.
So, to rib you... just one thing that concerns several wow-insider-readers: Please be more attentive when writing comments. ;)
Bearskunk Jan 29th 2008 5:20AM
@9 - So what? You still can hop into a battleground anytime you want and will quickly enough accumulate S1 gear, the other way around with a PVP player just queuing up for Black Temple won't work at all. Less QQ please.
Rhyn Jan 29th 2008 9:03AM
Undoubtedly this thread will fill up with naysayers and critics fairly quickly, so I just wanted to say that I found this piece highly informative and well-written. I have played WoW since August '07, thus there is still much of the game that is new and unknown to me. It was nice to read a concrete, well put together article such as this.
onyx.ceilican Jan 29th 2008 8:54AM
Single most retarded thing to ever come out of PVP was resilience... but then Blizz went one better and decided the ANTI CRIT stat of resilience should be used against DoT's too.
GG Blizz, listen to the whining and completely screw up your on stat. CRIT HIT, CRIT DMG, DoT's...
Anyone else find that table as hilarious as I do?
Probably not, most of you whine about locks like the rest of the nOOb kids who play WoW.
Dean Jan 29th 2008 9:38AM
Locks are fine. And they were still fine when resiliance first came out as the numbers were negligible. But affliction locks are the one class and spec in the game that do pretty much zero damage with crits. Is it really fair that that every other class gets thier damage reduced by around 10% on someone stacking 400 resiliance, and it has no effects on aff warlocks whatsover?
The alternative of course, was to make DoTs capable of critting. You're probably slathering at the mouth for this to be put in, but bear in mind this wouldn't just be adding a crit component that did 50% more damage for free. In reality all DoTs would nerfed to around 85% of current damage, critting at 135% of what they do now, so the baseline of a lock with around 20% spell crit would do the same numbers as they do now, any less would do less, more would do more.
This would cause aggro management problems in PvE and requirement for lots of lock gear to be re-itemised BUT it would them on even footage with everyone else, resiliance effecting them in exactly the same way so no-one could complain. It would also be a complete nightmare. So instead they just apply resiliance to DoT damage and solve it in a much simpler way.
But expecting resilience to reduce damage from every spec except affliction warlocks (and maybe feral bleed-druids)? Not going to happen is it?
Dean Jan 29th 2008 9:39AM
Locks are fine. And they were still fine when resiliance first came out as the numbers were negligible. But affliction locks are the one class and spec in the game that do pretty much zero damage with crits. Is it really fair that that every other class gets thier damage reduced by around 10% on someone stacking 400 resiliance, and it has no effects on aff warlocks whatsover?
The alternative of course, was to make DoTs capable of critting. You're probably slathering at the mouth for this to be put in, but bear in mind this wouldn't just be adding a crit component that did 50% more damage for free. In reality all DoTs would nerfed to around 85% of current damage, critting at 135% of what they do now, so the baseline of a lock with around 20% spell crit would do the same numbers as they do now, any less would do less, more would do more.
This would cause aggro management problems in PvE and requirement for lots of lock gear to be re-itemised BUT it would them on even footage with everyone else, resiliance effecting them in exactly the same way so no-one could complain. It would also be a complete nightmare. So instead they just apply resiliance to DoT damage and solve it in a much simpler way.
But expecting resilience to reduce damage from every spec except affliction warlocks (and maybe feral bleed-druids)? Not going to happen is it?
Dean Jan 29th 2008 9:30AM
"You can't just sit in the entrance to BT and get your gear after a few weeks, but you can lose your way into arena gear. Aka welfare epics.
I think Blizzard need to grow some stones and not give points to sub-1500 teams. People should be in arenas to compete, not to fail and still get gear. Raiders don't get gear for failing and not downing bosses."
Because of course, guilds with Black Temple or any of the 25-mans on farm never take in 23 uber-geared people and 2 alts or new recruits that are under-geared in order to gear them up.
Also Blizzard do go out of thier way to offer rewards to raiders who do wipe on bosses: they're called epic trash drops and reputation rewards. It's not much, but nor are the arena points you get for losing lots.
Still, I reckon Blizzard should grow some stones and not allow people that are dead at the end of raid encounters to get any loot. Afterall, if you died you screwed up and as you say, you shouldn't be rewarded for failing ;)
Jasperwind Jan 29th 2008 10:28AM
"I think Blizzard need to grow some stones and not give points to sub-1500 teams."
I agree with this statement, but maybe that's because I haven't started Arena yet. I may change my mind when my rating is about 1000. ;-)
Bob Jan 29th 2008 10:36AM
If you run a competition and you know people are basically cheating then you are obligated to do someting about it. Yes. If you are AFK in a BG or just throwing 10 games a week you are cheating.
Roboticus Jan 29th 2008 10:27AM
One way to address the ease with which you can /dance your way to an epic every 8 weeks in the arena would be to build on the success of the 1850 and 2000 rating requirements for weapons and shoulders. I believe that dynamic worked very well and should be extended to all other pieces, albeit with a wide range of requirements.
For example, require a team rating of 1400 for the gloves, 1500 for the legs, 1600 for the head, 1700 for the chest, and so forth. Make it so that the 1200 /dancing teams have an incentive to work towards.
Besides lessening the effect of "welfare-epics," this dynamic would lower the level of entry for first-time arena players (because the lower brackets would not be filled with s2-3 gear) and would make the arena gear seem not so ubiquitous, and therefore, a tad more exciting to see it on a character.
Jasperwind Jan 29th 2008 10:36AM
Good ideas. Hopefully Blizz will make some adjustments when season 4 starts.... whenever that will be.
However, I do have a concern with it all. For newcomers like me that have never been in an Arena, it is intimidating. What if a few guildies and I wearing mostly blues and even greens wants to get into Arena. Aren't we pretty much doomed before we start? If you have been competing since season 1 or 2 and already have mostly S2/S3 gear, you're just going to get higher ratings and better gear. While players like me get nothing and have no chance of climbing up the latter.
Maybe the current design is a way to level the playing field for newcomers, similar to greens replacing purples in BC and WotLK.
Sorry for my ramblings.
Zach Jan 29th 2008 12:06PM
@Jasperwind: Unfortunately, Season 3 is probably the hardest Arena season to start doing Arenas. There are many S1 and S2 geared teams who have been doing it longer. There are personal rating requirements for some pieces. On a good note, better Resilience gear has been made available with S1 being purchasable with Honor.
Don't worry about it though. Play Arena with your friends or guildmates. You will win some, you will lose some. Don't get frustrated about it... even if you just pour time into 10 games a week, you'll accrue Arena points. If you don't perform as well, it'll be much slower, but if you're not seriously competitive, just have fun with the matches and try to learn. I learn SO MUCH from PvP. That's probably one of the most fun things about it.
Gargoyle Jan 29th 2008 10:33AM
Bosses wont get stronger after you lose to them. Your arena opponents will. Winners aquire gear faster than losers, thats the reward.
Res was a good addition to the game. 15sec arena battles would suck.
Well written article!
Bentwick Jan 29th 2008 10:34AM
Welfare epics are probably one of the best things Blizzard has ever done for the game. Hardcore raiders may whine that it lessens their accomplishments, and removes them from the top dog position in the game but...
Welfare epics effectively create two different end game paths: Raiding for the minority of people that live for WoW, and PVP for the rest of us casual people that still pretend we have lives outside WoW. (And yes some people are really sick and do both.) Casual players needed some end game love. If you didn't have time to consistently raid there was no way to improve your character. Characters, I might add, that we had worked on just as hard as the raiding people to get to top level. So we now have a reason to keep playing our cherished alter egos and at the same time pay our monthly fees to Blizzard so they can work on more end-game raiding content.
As to it lessening the accomplishments of raiders.... well, two points here: #1 casual pvp players will never get to experience the content hardcore raiders work so hard on. I will likely never get to face Illidan. As someone that played all of the RTS WC games thats a bit of a let down for me. But real life won't go away (easily) so I must play casually. Point #2, I had the luck to be part of my guild's first Gruul kill (Gruul style encounters are awesome - short time commiment, hard fight). Anyways, the sense of accomplishment when we got him was amazing. Winning an AV pales in comparison. Enjoy that.
And I'm sorry you guys (raiders) are no longer top dog in town. You certainly deserve some distinction for downing the bosses you do. I don't think it should be in the ability to walk over casual (yet dedicated) PVPers - these are two seperate tracks now. I was quite surprised that Blizzard made the choice to use the same models for Arena gear and T4/T5/T6 gear. It would be a nice nod to the raiders, imho, if the T4/T5/T6 was distinct (and maybe even a little 'cooler' looking).
So we have two seperate tracks, one for the raiders and one for the PVPers. Would it be fair for a T6 geared player to nuke a top Arena 3 geared player? I don't think so, and neither did Blizzard so we have resilience. I won't argue the workings of resilience, not having a good understanding of it and being highly crit specced myself means I don't have a knowledgeable, objective opinion. But its here, and it's... well, just get used to it. People QQ about nerfs, mechanics changes, etc... but to be honest I'm just happy Blizzard cares enough to constantly fiddle w/ things. Things could be a lot worse than they are, WoW could be a dead game.
Raiders, enjoy the amazing content Blizzard is making JUST FOR YOU! ...And the amazing accomplishments of downing these god-bosses. And remember that even the casual player is spending his hard earned cash to improve someone he worked to 70 just as hard as you did (though maybe not as fast). Both styles of play have their place, both have their top dogs. Everyone should be happy.
jr Jan 29th 2008 10:42AM
"I believe PvP takes as much commitment as raiding if you want to excel. Resilience is the defining stat that makes endgame PvP distinct. Endgame PvP is defined and dictated by your Resilience."
No it doesn't, it takes 10 games a week.
Resiliance ruined pvp and only made it difficult, for those that wanna pvp a bit, to enjoy it.
I also wanna say that pvp and pve are not really different end-game tracks, no lore unfolds with pvp. If by end game you mean losing a buch of matches until you aquire enough points for some purples with resiliance on it I guess that is endgame. I think of endgame as something a bit more dynamic than fighting the same groups of people in the same settings, over and over and over again.
PvP was just a diversion, now you cant do that anymore. If you have a life you gotta EITHER PvP and grinding the same crap forever without any lore/story progression sucks or PvE and there you still have a bit of grinding however you move on eventually and experiance the story of WoW. PvP WAS a way to break up the MC farm runs, now there is no outlet unless you enjoy losing all the time. Resiliance basically made both aspects of this a huge grind, without diversion, though I will stick with PvE as Blizzard spends its time creating story/lore and I'd like to experiance that and that is something PvP does not offer.
Bob Jan 29th 2008 10:52AM
Wouldn't it be nice if WotLK actually incorporated some lore based world PvP. Something that rewareded you more than a temporary zone wide buff? Maybe PvP raids? Outdoor PvP only zones?
Bentwick Jan 29th 2008 11:00AM
Very true that PVP doesn't further any of the plot lines in the world. And I can attest that honor grinding can get quite boring (and often frustrating). But lots of casual players have no other options but quitting once they hit 70 and do the majority of the 5 man instances.
And I think a lot of the PVEers are missing something. Just as downing Illidan takes an experienced, skilled guild; getting high in the Arena ratings requires an experienced, skilled team. Is all that arena gear spoiling BGs for PVE players? It sounds like it, but sans welfare epics BGs would suck for non-raiding, Tier 4/5/6-less 70s casuals in blues and greens.
If teams going into BGs were balanced better - blue/green wearers against other blue/green wearers for example, I suspect we'd not be having this conversation. I put my time in and did the honor grind to get from blues to purples and yeah it sucked but you know, I had no other outlet for my character. It was either go through the pvp fire, roll an alt or quit WoW.
I just didn't want to walk away from a character I had spent months getting to 70.
Dean Jan 29th 2008 11:17AM
What about those who just want to raid a bit, to enjoy it? Why can't I just go a see Illidan for a bit of fun? I guess I could go into SSC but I'd just keep dying and that's no fun...
10 games a week isn't endgame PvP anymore than clearing Kara for 3 hours a week is endgame raiding.
And when you start doing arenas you will lose a lot, as you'll be matched against people with much better gear than you, and possibly of higher skill. 1500 is an average rating. By definition, half of teams are going to be below that rating. Getting and holding a 1500 rating is the PvP equivalent of having Kara on farm. People languishing at 1200-1300 are like those still stuck on Curator or Aran. And when a guild starts raiding Kara and are trying each week for that first Aran kill, they still get loot for all those earlier bosses.
Furthur up, 1700-1800 is SSC/TK level, 2000+ is BT level.
The one thing that always makes it obvious when raiders post about the arena having never played it is they assume anyone with under a 1500 rating is AWFUL, just because it's where you start. The reality is that holding onto 1500 points requires decent PvP gear and more than a modicum of skill.
You can still take your raid gear and PvP for a bit, you won't win all the time, you'll lose a lot. But if you only get enjoyment out of winning then PvP really isn't for you. It's Player Vs Player! For every player that wins, another player loses! And of course, it'll be the players who spend most of thier time PvPing that win most of the matches, as they have more suitable gear, and frankly more practice means more skill.
Pre-TBC, when raid gear dominated PvP, and you were going in to enjoy rolling over less well geared PvP fans, so you could enjoy winning, how do you think they felt? Because they were losing. PvP: Someone always loses. In the past PvPers lost to PvEers. Now PvEers lose to PvPers. Would it be nice if everyone could be a winner and no-one had to lose? Of course, but that's not possible is it?
Bentwick Jan 29th 2008 11:30AM
Dean, well said!
jr Jan 29th 2008 11:35AM
"It's Player Vs Player! For every player that wins, another player loses! And of course, it'll be the players who spend most of thier time PvPing that win most of the matches, as they have more suitable gear, and frankly more practice means more skill."
Gear>Skill and rather than PvP being the diversion it once was it is a crap grind that really sucks the fun out of it. I am dubious as to whether PvP actually takes much skill since it rewards people win or lose. I frankly fail to see why it should be impossible for fresh 70s to start in the arean w/o worrying about being utterly destroyed without any hope of winning because of gear and lets face it only a few people enjoy losing all the time.
If PvP skill was actually being tested by the arena the gear would all be the same and it wouldn't take a crappy grind to get it. PvP is about giving players that think grouping is too much effort a way to flex their e-peen.
Fact is that arena makes people lazy, most raiders quit raiding to do arena because the gear is insanely easy to get as compared to raid gear. 2-5 people are way easier to manage than 25. Lazy players that just wanna do the same stuff over and over again now get epics for little effort, all they need is the tenacity to continue farming honor for a few weeks. That is what pvp epic gear is all about, its not progression, its not end game, because in PvP there isn't any end to it.
Let me sum it up. PvP is that 12 year old that gets huge entertainment out of camping a corpse for 1hr or more straight. I just don't see the skill in that or why it should be given such a huge reward.