The Care and Feeding of Warriors: Some Thoughts About Tanking part 2
In short (seriously, Rossi, that boat sailed into the North Atlantic and hit an iceberg), opinions linger beyond their factual truth, and affect players beliefs well past the point of their validity. This is both a blessing and a curse to the tanking warrior, especially in raids. If people believe that warriors are the best tanks, there will be more warrior tanks whether or not there are actually real, mathematically provable discrepancies that benefit other tanks. This also means that in the pressure cooker of hard mode, high damage, cooldown rotation raid tanking, players will often choose to rotate a tank based solely on a small and possibly even nonexistent advantage. I had to go point to logs that proved my DK was dying more than my warrior before I could get people to believe the warrior was the better choice to tank Sarth.Reputations linger, and the impact they have on tank choice is real. Tanks will be swapped based on something as small as a belief that x class will make a small difference in how much healing will be needed in order to learn a hard mode fight.
We want to see more paladin and druid MTs, and part of that includes raiders accepting them as legitimate tanking classes, and those players feeling that if they go through the effort to gear up that we're not going to banish them down to OT status again. Similarly, we wanted to slow down the number of groups that appeared to be swapping to a DK for their MT, seemingly permanently, because they were convinced they would just always be the best tank. We have no problem with warriors being the most popular tank (and they still are) because there is a long legacy there and a lot of those characters have been around awhile. But we also want the other 3 tanking classes to feel legit.
Why are warriors still the most popular tank, then? It's possible to argue for legacy again here. Warriors have been an accepted tanking class for the entire existence of the game, to the point where if you say 'tank' sometimes you still have players who automatically think warrior. This blade cuts both ways, of course; being a DPS warrior you'll hear a lot of people telling you that you should be a tank instead. That's what the player base expects from warriors. Does this mean that they want to see less warriors as tanks? GC says "Nope. It's not a population issue. I hope that's not what people take from my post. There are more warrior tanks and there always have been. We see no reason to try and nerf our way to 25% of all tanks being warriors."
Now, I've seen arguments back and forth that this means that warriors aren't going to get tanking buffs they need purely because there are so many of them. To be honest, as a warrior, I kind of don't see any major buffs needed. Other tanks might need rebalancing down in some areas and up in others, but warriors feel like a very solid, very flexible tanking class to me, albeit one that requires a significant investment in time to figure out fully.
In comparison, tanking on my DK feels ludicrously simple compared to my warrior. The warrior is clearly very fiddly in comparison, even after I built a macro that auto-spams Heroic Strike for me so that I don't have to endure any more carpal tunnel HS pounding. (It feels like I'm cheating to use it, but until HS is a more interesting ability for a tank than 'spam the heck out of this' I'm going to keep my macro.) The warriors array of cooldowns and tricks compares favorably to the DK: in general, tanking on the warrior actually feels like tanking, while tanking on the DK is very close to how I DPS on him and has less of a 'must build threat now' feel to it. I'd like to see warrior boosts to AoE threat without making Shockwave spammable (if anything, warriors as tanks have been moving away from ability spam, I don't want us to lose that).
The problem between tanking classes, in my opinion, is directly locked into the increase move towards difficulty in raid encounters being based solely on instant gib moves from bosses. Telling tanking classes to stack more threat abilities is all fine and good as long as you're also not asking them to go in and tank a boss that can rip their heads off in one or two hits. And any tanking class inequities that are perceived by the player base will be dramatically emphasized by a boss that can more easily instakill class X than class y.
It is impossible to balance all four tanking classes so that they all have comparable abilities for any and all situations in the game. Making them all viable 5 man tanks was in of itself an amazing technical challenge. What we need is a series of encounters per raid that emphasize all four classes strengths so that you'll never want to sideline anyone, while still allowing other clases to be capable of tanking said encounters so that raids will never again be in the Mount Hyjal/ZA Dragonhawk situation of "bring X tank or go home". In other words, it's not the classes that are the issue in current tank design, it's the encounters built around massive spikes and gimmicks that can ruin an entire attempt in 2 seconds, and these encounters will always create perceptions of tank superiority in the minds of those players working on them.
I'm not arguing that there are not issues with each tanking class that should be addressed, nor am I arguing that warriors are fine and should L2play, a phrase I find pernicious and irritating. I'm arguing that the nature of tanking as it stands at present divides tanking into two (morphing into three as 10 man raiding takes on aspects from both 5 and 25 and hybridizes itself) almost completely different games. In the first game, pretty much any tank will do. In the second, decisions are made on razor-keen distinctions, and as long as that game is predicated on cooldown rotations being king, some tank classes will always feel weaker than others and real concerns will always be sidelined by that distinction.
Until this situation is addressed, the inertial pressure of so many warriors tanking will work against the class even as other classes are touted as the tank which makes most encounters easier. Warrior tanks will always be the standard by which other tanks are judged and judge themselves, purely due to their ingrained popularity. This is the sword that hangs over the class' head.






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
bean.delphiki Sep 11th 2009 8:20PM
Personally, I just have more fun on my Warrior tank than I do on my Pally tank, although I would have to say it's "easier" to tank on my pally with the 969 rotations.
I don't think Warrior tanks will ever go away, and I have nothing against other classes being _able_ to tank, but the Warrior is the first, the prime example that other tanks are molded after in terms of Blizzard creating an effective tank.
Elmouth Sep 12th 2009 2:27AM
Other tanks aren't molded after warriors anymore, this may have been true early in the tanking rehaul, but Tanking as a whole is beyond any specific class.
The fact that they are thinking of remolding thunderclap to make it more similar to consecration is a good exemple of this.
On topic:
I personally find it way easier to tank on my prot warrior than I do on my DK. I hate having to waste time applying deseases in order to build my aggro. Both my warrior and my pally have a much easier time with this.
I actually despise tanking on my DK, while I love tanking my warr/pally. There is a whole gimmick to DK tanking that used to be fun back when being dependant on CDs made them different. But its not the case anymore, Dk tanking feels forced and it being constantly nerf'd every single patch makes you wonder why the hell you'd be bothering with it. Sure at high-end gear/raid setting it may be better (not anymore really...) but if its not fun all along the way, like it was when I was gearing my warrior/pally up, then there really is no good reason to stick with a DK tank aside from it being "OP".
I feel in their attempts to bring the DKs in line with warriors/pallies, they have butchered its uniqueness and made it a wreck, only used by crazy maximizing freaks.
As far as I'm concerned, Warriors/Pallies tanks is where its at. DK days are over. Sure there will always be those who geared up while it was OP and will always manage to keep up, but I get the feeling people are pulling away from the whole "must have dk tank" idea.
Paladins and Warriors atm are better than DKs. Druids are as usual last in line, poor things.
Dhirvish Sep 12th 2009 8:31PM
One issue I've seen completely overlooked on the "why warriors are still the prefered tank".
Answer: Acheivements and skills and similar things in the game.
You've been playing that toon for years, do you really want to level up all the necessary skills, acheivements, acquire cool mounts, rep, etc on a totally new tank just because it's slightly better at the moment? HECK NO. So you stick with the tank thats always been there, who's name you know (because how many of us call the person who's playing their 2nd/3rd/etc toon by their main's name?).
There are more warrior tanks b/c for a majority of the game it was the best tank out there and has the most emotional and time investment by players.
Sarakin Sep 11th 2009 8:29PM
I definitely agree on the when you say tank a person thinks warrior thing.
Hell I decided I wanted to try tanking so I started levelling up my warrior. He's only 38 right now but i'm workin on it
Gamer am I Sep 11th 2009 8:46PM
"...as long as that game is predicated on cooldown rotations being king, some tank classes will always feel weaker than others..."
Too true. As long as this is true, druids will always get the short end of the tanking stick. What do we have for defensive cooldowns?
Barkskin: Good, but weak.
Frenzied Regeneration: saps our threat and doesn't reduce damage taken.
That's it. I guess the perception of bears as tanks that use massive health pools and high armor to soak up hits still exists, despite the fact that that is no longer our tanking niche.
Matthew Rossi Sep 11th 2009 9:31PM
Survival Instincts?
Eros Sep 11th 2009 11:54PM
Bear stand dose give you a few extra seconds for your healer to save you, but druids still lack a powerful oh sh#t button.
Matthew Rossi Sep 12th 2009 2:15AM
Eros (and Gamer am I)
At present I've only tanked endgame on the Warrior and DK, and I'm much more familiar with the warrior (been tanking on him since MC) so forgive my ignorance of Druid tanking mechanics. I am working to eventually have four different tanks so that I have a full understanding, but there's only so much time.
Scott Sep 12th 2009 10:31AM
I'm a feral tank and am the Main Tank for our 10s guild, currently working on Watchers in Ulduar. Used to be I would just stack armor, and socket everything with a +24 Stam gem, though lately I've given over that method and subbed in AGI gems to up my dodge, so while I have less of an "omg huge druid health pool," I have more avoidance.
I find whether I'm in a guild run or just some heroics, even a PUG'd 25 every now and then, I'm still a very formidable tank, with great threat gen, good survivability, and I've never heard a healer complain that I was terribly difficult to heal. Maybe I just have good healers (I'm sure I do), but from my viewpoint at least, druids make great tanks, and as long as their player understands the concept of tab-Maul + Swipe, AE threat ceases to be an issue, or at least that's been the case for me.
velutina Sep 12th 2009 6:28PM
My main is a druid tank. I also have an 80 warrior tank and a 73 pally tank. I find the druid to be the most fun to play and the easiest to tank with. Maybe it's just a gear imbalance but his threat is insane, and damage is higher. The warrior is the most "fiddly." There are overabundance of skills to use and the treat comes more slowly, particularly on large groups. I also find the lack of an AoE taunt for the warrior to be notable in its absence. I find the paladin easier to play than the warrior, but a bit less fun than the druid. The paladin also feels a bit more fragile and buff dependent than the druid. My DK is only getting started but will be a tank too.
jbodar Sep 11th 2009 9:07PM
Good article. As in the rest of life, Perceptions > Reality.
Wyred Sep 12th 2009 10:19AM
Surely perception=reality, no?
Kurdon Sep 11th 2009 9:48PM
I wholeheartedly agree with many points, but most particularly on the "warriors need a boost to AoE threat" comment. Paladins are significantly better at avoiding death against massive hits, soaking up damage as we do, have comparable CDs to rely on as extra "Oh crap" buttons, and spank us resoundingly when it comes to AoE tanking. We've improved in that area significantly since LK came out, but I wouldn't mind just a little bit more. As for the rest, I also feel like we're not only doing rather well and are probably one of the funnest tanks to play, we're also the most mobile, visceral, and engaging. A skilled prot warrior with strong situational awareness is hard to beat.
One other thing I would include on my wish list is making the 20% magic damage reduction when shield block is up a baseline effect instead of a set bonus. It's not overpowered (else they wouldn't have given it to us as a set bonus in the first place), and gives us something to rely on besides a couple of talent points to mitigate a bit of magic-based damage. Those two things would "complete" prot warriors in their current incarnation in my mind.
My guild traditionally runs with one prot pally and two prot warriors as their tanks, with a few others available in the mix to pick up additional slack as needed via secondary specs, and the only time we relented that another type of tank was ever necessary was during our Sarth + 3 drakes efforts.
Having said all that, something struck me while you were listing out the various tanks and their viability. Blizzard has been vocal about how it wants to make sure all tanks are equal. But this seems contradictory to their stance regarding pure dps classes being highest on the damage meters with hybrids falling in line beneath by foreseeable percentages. If a class that can heal, dps, or tank can tank just as well (arguably better) as another class that can only dps and tank, is that truly fair? Just food for thought. (and yes, I do also have a paladin, so I'm not intentionally trying to rain hate down on my pally brethren by opening this can of worms).
richardson_g Sep 11th 2009 9:56PM
A very good and thoughtful post Rossi, though I think you meant to say shift in the first section. Anyway I agree with a lot of what you say here but i'd like to add a few key points. As far as warriors go we are in an ok place. The changes in recent patches have definitely benefited us a lot. And with the coming change in defence and block in Cataclysm we will definitely become easier to tank as we can focus more on other stats that help in our DPS, Health, or other factors. This will make tanking, and dps-ing, somewhat better for warriors as we no longer have to deal with a gimp blocking stat. What would be nice for the developers to do though is to add 5 things to warriors minimum:
1) Make it possible to increase our 100 rage cap. Rogues can, Death Knights can, why can't Warriors? If even an increase of say 30 through talents (hint hint Blizz this could be a "fun" warrior talent you want us to take in the new talent cataclysm system) would be nice as it gives us slightly more utility in when and how often we can use certain abilities
2) Have Shockwave be 360 degrees and still have the 10 yard radius but also increase its threat generation slightly. This would definitely help us in AoE tanking as when combined with Thunderclap would provide a surefire way to grab any loose mobs that are behind us. It's annoying as hell to have a mob get past you and having to try and rearrange everything just to snatch him.
3) Change Vigilance. It's a nice ability in 5 mans were there is a clear cut top dps who you need to keep in check. But in raids a lot of times people compete in threat generation. Having it be able to be talented/glyphed to be a raid wide buff that retains the same stats would be wonderful in threat gen and raid safety.
4) Our shouts. Now while most people would say our shouts definitely need to be changed I'm iffy on it. The shouts' talents however could use a bit of tuning. Maybe have the shouts stay the same but combine Booming Voice, which increases the area of effect and duration of your Commanding Shout by 25/50%, and Commanding Presence, which increases the health bonus of your Commanding Shout by 5-25%, into 1 talent. Do this but make Commanding Presence 25/50% as well instead. This would at maximum talented give a Commanding Shout that was 3,382 Health and 60 yard range and 3 min length, a Battle Shout that was +822 AP and 60 yard range and 3 min length, and Demoralizing Shout would -615 AP from bosses and 15 yard range and 45 sec long debuff. Doing this, imo, would help increase the utility of each of the shouts as well as give us a reason to use the "shout's" talents. The "Commanding Voice" talent would need to be a tier 1 talent so all the warriors could use it. Doing this increases our effective health of our raid members by more as well as increases the range they can be away from us and still gain the buff, giving it more utility when compared against raid wide buffs without a range
5) Change Heroic Strike from a spammable ability. While I currently have it macro'd to my Devastate for single target and a Cleave to my devastate for multi target tanking, I'd like to see it gain some better use with out it being a carpal tunnel inducing, as Rossi so eloquently put it, ability. At early levels its darn near useless and in raid tanking we sometimes end up having limitless rage depending on how the boss is hitting us, meaning we use it so much it hurts our hands like a (bleep). Maybe making it (and this is a very vague idea here that I have no idea how it would be balanced atm) more of a combination of the current Overpower and Heroic strike, in essence mirroring Rune Strike. What I mean by this is have the new Heroic Strike act more like Rune Strike (which in essence is a combined overpower heroic strike when you read the tooltips) So the new one would be a reaction ability that cost 10 rage. Instantly strikes the enemy for 125% weapon damage plus [1/5 AP] and causes a high amount of threat. Only usable after the warrior dodges, parries, or blocks an attack. Cannot be dodged, blocked, or parried. Doing this would help to make it more of a reaction based ability that still gives the benefit of high threat but reduces the rage dump making it a choice ability that is used in threat gen and not a spammable ability.
Anyways these are my ideas based on stuff you've said in the past and in this article and other ideas from forums. Honestly as far as tanking niches go I'd love it if they simply went from 5 man to 10 man to 20 man to 40 man. (gets rid of that odd 5 people when you drop down in raid size) This would let 5 man be simple dungeon, 10 man be the new heroic form of dungeons. 20 man raids would be the new normal version and 40 man raids would be the heroic version of a raid. This would let 10 man groups get a slight taste of what it's like to do a full raid without being as difficult to tune as a raid and have 20 man groups be tuned to be a normal version while having the return of 40 man raids. Would love any comments or suggestions. Please no flames as that's not constructive to this blog, this comment, or the warrior community as a whole. We can only get better if we work together. Peace and sorry for the wall o'text.
Byronius Sep 12th 2009 1:48AM
I really enjoyed your thoughts and suggestions for warrior tanking. As a dedicated warrior tank from the beginning (Both my specs are prot for different situations, lol), these ideas are refreshing and I found myself gasping at the Vigilance idea and how profoundly simple and fantastic a solution that would be. The only thing I would say about that idea would be that a raid-wide threat transfer is too substantial and I think it would have to implemented in a similar way to Glyph of Shield Wall, where you give up the 10% for a raid wide effect (and the 3% damage reduction imo) to where it's reduced to 5% or so. This would be a little more reasonable and make Glyph of Vigilance far more interesting (imo) as the boost from it could put it back up to 10% (or maybe 7%) threat transfer to make a warrior a better AoE tank and competitive with Paladins even. I know I dread situations where I'm tab targeting in a raid and know I won't be able to keep up with the AoE from the 4-5+ ranged guys who are AoE'ing adds like crazy. Your suggestion would make this a reasonable situation. I'd also have to say that the Shockwave change you were thinking of wouldn't nearly be as necessary with a change to Vig like that, and I think that it would have to be one or the other, of which I'd prefer a change to Vig.
Also, I personally have been in support of a buff to Warrior utilities and your idea would really make that happen in a way that would make a difference while not sacrificing too much to make it happen. I agree with the Overpower/Heroic Strike idea as well, especially as a reaction ability, as I have always loved Revenge and wouldn't mind something else like that, though it might be better if it was tied in the same way Overpower is, where it works when the enemy dodges, parries or blocks. I suppose it would be the Prot flavor of Overpower, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing and would eliminate that nasty Heroic Strike-spam problem.
As for instance suggestions, I don't feel like there is enough of a problem with 5's, 10's and 25's to change it. I don't mind not being the best at every fight, though it can be frustrating at times. I feel so "at home" in ten mans, and the need to adapt and adjust is what brings a lot of flavor to the game for me. I think adding another tier of 10 man heroic dungeons is pretty interesting though, and those being "mini-raids" could be fun. I don't necessarily agree that it's necessary, but I wouldn't necessarily be against it.
Also, one thing I would add is the combo of talents, glyphs and/or ability tweaks to make Shield Block + Spell Reflect a 10 or 20% damage reduction. I love switching into my Tier 8 for that bonus but I hate the idea of having to gear down to have it in a possible future encounter similar to Sarth. I think it would eliminate problems with bosses like Sarth3D where one tank seems to have a massive advantage and would add a flavor to warrior tanking that already exists on DK's. A flavor that is available but optional, so you'd only see it in certain situations. I think that's where you would see some Warrior tanks making different specs for different situations and would make things pretty interesting for tanks in the long term.
Byronius Sep 12th 2009 7:06AM
When I said damage reduction in the last part, I meant 20% MAGIC damage reduction. WTB edit.
breaklance Sep 11th 2009 10:17PM
so if im reading this correct your qq-ing about previous warrior issues of competition of which now are somewhat irrelevant. DK's are no longer good tanks, and most healers don't prefer them, warriors while still being considered a universal tank(which i have no idea why) in many raids are asked to have a handicap (k guys warrior aoe sucks so you got to wait a few seconds). In todays encounters of ToC warriors are somewhat middle ground.
Northrend beasts seems to have a bias agianst warriors because everyone I have talked to has the same opinion, and in hard mode beasts every guild that has downed them reported odd timing issues only with warrior tanks that others do not have happen (for example, the initial HIT of Impale hitting the same time a dot TICK of the previous impale hits ending up being around 55k damage in 1/100 of a second)
Jaraxxus they help as the MT's and are at a good advantage here in that they can keep sunders up on him 24-7, can aid in dispells, and can do a lot of their own interupts. The limited aoe abiltiies are warriors have them at a disadvantage for add tanking.
Faction Champs prot warriors can be a beast for. On 10 man you can tank an opponent to gain aggro for as long as the taunt debuff actually lasts, but add in numerous stuns, dispel, disarm, fear bomb, we can do well no matter 10 or 25 in raping up a hard hitting melee opponent.
Twin Valk tanks can go afk in all seriousness.
Anub'arak warriors are not so good all around. Having low health comparatively to equalling geared tanks and short cd's a prot warrior is more sussceptable to going down in phase 2. You can't tank the adds in burrow phases nor can you block their poison debuff(thanks in due part to sarth3d qq) and can't afford to have it on them opposed to the plethora of health or auto-save abilities other tanks have. For adds warriors have great mobility to puck them up but limited ranged threat to make sure they are on frost safely before dps pulls.
Overall warriors are fine for now and IF the change to blocking comes I foresee sheild tanks becoming dominant again expecially since blizzard can't seem to make any other bosses that dont hit for 70% of your hp on slowish swings, so blocking a proportion of those big hits will do a lot for sheild tanks. Warrior aoe is still not as gratifying as other classes. Cooldowns are fine in that they help but aren't op. Gearing is still a problem as again the more we gear up the less effectively we do in lower tiered raids(my warrior in naxx25 and scattered uld/toc upgrades has this problem in anything but ToC and uld hardmodes). But I'd rank tanks right now as Paladin>Druid>Warrior>DK for hardmodes Druid>Paladin>Warrior>DK
Matthew Rossi Sep 11th 2009 10:29PM
"so if im reading this correct your qq-ing about previous warrior issues of competition of which now are somewhat irrelevant."
No, you're not reading it correctly. In fact, I'm surprised you managed to read all of this and that's what you came up with.
ash Sep 12th 2009 2:43AM
I just want to say, reading through all that mountain of crap on the boards I really appreciate what Ghostcralwer does and I also appreciate Rossi's thoughtful response to the issues raised.
Xigageshi Sep 12th 2009 3:31AM
First off Mr. Rossi, I wanted to say that I thought this whole article was spot on.
The crux I think of a lot of balancing problems in this game in all aspects is the thing you touched on at the tail end of the article, "insta-gib abilities" wow has gotten increasingly twitch it seems. I understand that the whole point of mmos is to keep adding zeros onto the numbers but it has now gotten to a point with Wrath where unbalance is a rounding error away but simultaneously the whole game has "gotten easier" (though I disagree with the later.)
Looking forward though, Cataclysm's focus seems to be smoothing the experience and simplifying core boring aspects of play (stats) but continuing to keep the game fun through added variance. I for one was very happy to read around 'the internets' that blizzard was looking at adding class quests that explain key mechanics of the classes before the player gets to end game, that could be huge for casual players, and I suppose hardcore raiders will indirectly benefit a bit. :)
Keep up the good work Mr. Rossi!