No Profile Found
Mar 29th 2012 7:01PM I really hope these are *very* beta introductions. They timing is bad, the dialogue is weak, and I'm not sure it'll even make sense for the Pandaren characters who get that far. We'll see.
Mar 26th 2012 11:43PM You absolutely can throw on a shield in combat. Weapon/shield swapping in combat is currently do-able and doesn't require modification of other skills/abilities. Good DPS warriors do a swap-to-shield and shield-wall vs. some massive damage phases. So you're wrong about that.
If you happen to have the glyph on, you can't use your Demonology form to DPS because, well, all your major DPS cooldown abilities are now tanking related abilities, and you generate massive amounts of threat. Metamorphosis is a core DPS cooldown for Demonology Warlocks, and you're not a viable DPSer if you can't use it to DPS.
Mar 26th 2012 11:32PM Re: data mining.
Is it really data mining if people are, you know, playing the beta and getting the results described? It's not a matter of people looking in the data files and finding out that there are all these other things. They're playing the game. The warlock tank works (too well, right now). It's not like nobody has seen it functioning in game.
Mar 26th 2012 11:17PM Have you read *all* the effects that the Glyph of Demon Hunting has/had? It converts so many abilities, provides all the necessary abilities for tanking, provides tons (excessive even) of mitigation, and provides tons (excessive) of damage.
This isn't anything like Distracting Shot.
That glyph wasn't designed with a niche role in mind. It looks a lot more like a developer was trying to prove the viability of Demonology tanking -- and succeeded. But GC says its a no-go.
Mar 26th 2012 11:14PM Well, this sucks.
It sucks not only because Ghostcrawler poo-poo'd it, but his explanation also doesn't make sense. "We don't want Warlocks to be a tanking class" would've been valid. But saying "we want this to work like a Warrior throwing on a shield or a cat Druid going bear for a brief time" shows a deliberate sort of misrepresentation.
A warlock can't just DPS with this glyph in their book. They have to tank and DPS with it. There's too much threat, too much mitigation, and too many full-on tanking tools associated with it. You can't throw the glyph on in combat, so it won't work there, either.
Ghostcrawler also comments that tanks are supposed to need a separate set for tanking. Tell that to Druids and Monks. They'll be happily reforging their leather -- there's no reason a cloth tank couldn't reforge their cloth.
Ultimately, it sounds like we're getting a gimmick boss that will require an absurd amount of mitigation (vs. avoidance) and that Warlocks will fill that role for one fight with one glyph. Instead of just making this Warlock tanking into a real thing. And that's disappointing, because there's a fun option here that they're just not taking.
Mar 26th 2012 2:29PM I think that the expansion will be quite playable and fun, and that Pandaren are cool in and of themselves, but that giving them an expansion that is focused on them still feels weird.
The core of the WoW story is that Sargeras is out there somewhere, the Burning Legion is out there somewhere, and this crazy little planet of Azeroth is somehow special or important in this grand, universal scheme.
The idea of Pandaren becoming this big, center-of-attention race in the world of Azeroth is just weird. It could end up executed in a really smart fashion (at least, not as neglected as the Goblins and Worgen were in Cataclysm), and perhaps their philosophy will add something special to the most significant part of the story. I can see that working.
But we just destroyed a Dragon Aspect who tried to shatter the world. And the Pandas show up after that? It seems like they might've had an interest in, you know, not having the world destroyed.
Mar 23rd 2012 2:36PM ITT, posters who forget that:
A. Garrosh requested/insisted that the duel be to the death, rather than to submission.
B. Garrosh's weapon was poisoned... It's arguable that he should've/could've been able to tell that something was tampered with along the way.
Still, a duel to the death is a duel to the death. But it wasn't a fair duel.