Nov 23rd 2009 9:42AM Omigosh, kittens are cute!
Oct 30th 2009 4:36PM The problem is that the channel is turned on by default for everyone. Thus, it becomes monopolized by bored people seeking attention or arguments or whatever.
The general idea behind limiting access to the channel is to both limit the audience of the channel and thus make it less attractive to troll, and to make it so that you are not generally exposed to that kind of nonsense when you're actually doing something in the game.
Jul 26th 2009 2:09AM Well, not quite. But yes, I am describing a system that would essentially make rage work more like Runic Power or Energy than it does now. Except the problem remains that it would still be worse in movement-based fights.
Runic Power and Energy both accumulate at a fairly constant rate over time (well okay, Runic Power accumulates when you use runes that refresh at a constant rate over time). This means that even when DKs or rogues are stuck not DPSing, they're still getting more resources that they can then spend when they get back into melee. Warriors just aren't, and that's one of the main problems in the article. There's no really good way to keep rage the way it is while solving that problem.
Jul 25th 2009 7:15PM It wouldn't quite be like energy, since you'd only get it when you're actually in melee. Furthermore, you could give, say, double rage on a crit and half rage on a miss, so that your stats did have something to do with it. It would be very similar to the current system, except that it wouldn't depend on your weapon's DPS stats. Thus, your rate of rage generation would remain roughly constant through several tiers of weapon upgrades. The fact that it doesn't now is one of the problems identified in the post.
Jul 25th 2009 3:51PM I can see a few possible solutions to the problems that still keep some of the unique nature of range intact, but which solution is best depends on what you see as the main problem.
The articles identifies three problems:
1. Rage is gear-dependent. Poorly-geared warriors do unusually bad DPS and well-geared warriors do so well that they get nerfed. Sort of a scaling problem. A solution to this might be to remove the actual damage figure from rage generation. Have each white hit generate an amount of rage normalized by attack speed. That's still dependent on hit percentage, but you could even have a certain amount of rage generated by a miss. The risk here is that it sort of turns rage into runic power, except generated by white attacks instead of special attacks.
2. Geared defenders get rage-starved. You could partially fix this again by removing the actual damage component and having each hit give a defender a certain amount of rage independent of the damage done. This might be trickier to balance, as different bosses have widely different attack speeds and sequences.
3. The problem you seem to devote the most space to though is that fights requiring a lot of movement cause warriors to suffer. It's a major design issue with the class, to the point where it might not even be an "issue", just a fact. You could give warriors some sort of rage-generation cooldown that only works then they're out of melee, or you could make the "re-engage" abilities like intercept and charge generate more rage to make up for the rage that the warriors supposedly missed by being out of melee. But of course both of those abilities do end up rewarding warriors for being out of melee, which is completely against every other class mechanic.
I think that sucking at movement-based fights might ultimately be what makes warriors unique and special.