01-05-2005, 10:47 PM
*shameless intrusion*
This may sound a bit odd, but I think any warrior guide would be incomplete unless it were to include two always-overlooked aspects â communication and social interaction. Warriors need to learn how to communicate effectively with their allies, how to compromise with others' preferences, and how other people want to play the game. Bear with me â¦
Warriors, as tanks, tend to become the leaders of groups, or at least the callers during battle. Rarely, this role falls to the priest or the puller, but it usually seems to be the tank. (Keep in mind I'm speaking from personal experience, but it is experience.) A lack of communication between the tank and the rest of the group leads to huge misunderstandings when rule #1 (Things Will Go Wrong) comes into play. Everyone can know what theyâre supposed to do in ideal situations, but without knowledge of what to do when things are falling to pieces, everyone tends to fall back on their own individual survival template, which works against the group cohesion and tends to hasten the dismal end.
Hence, an essay on warrior communication should break down into three quick sections. First, the initial âlectureâ given to a new group to let them know what their expected roles are for maximized efficiency. Second, quick-key codes that can be typed during battle to signify specific actions and to let the group know what the warrior is doing / planning / thinking of doing. And third, how to keep things somewhat controlled when everything falls to pieces and group cohesion is threatened. The alternative (which unfortunately is the only situation Iâve so far experienced) is the warrior dying and blaming everyone else for being âstupidâ and letting their mind-reading skills go on the fritz, and for being "bad dogs" and not taking barked orders properly.
Which leads into the social part of things â¦
I understand that warriors are the keystone of high-level parties that are running instances. They are also the reason why I refuse to join any group that includes a warrior, ever. I donât like being yelled at, âschooled,â or being made to curb my play style to cater to someone elseâs âbetterâ way of doing things ... especially when that "better" way ends up giving me less treasure, less gold, and less experience per hour. Iâve been lectured by warriors on how to play a ârealâ rogue so many times that Iâve given up on them, and gone on to strictly solo play. I'm doing just fine, thank you, and I can afford better equipment at the AH than what you're wearing, with money left over, without having to roll for things against you that you don't even need. (Why did you need a leather chestpiece when you're wearing plate? Why? Why?!? And then you get furious when I compete for the one-handed sword, which I actually use when you're set on maces ...)
Ahem.
:blush:
Anyway. Maybe they know how a rogue should function in a warrior-controlled group, but that way not only conflicts with my play style, it also makes me weaker and less effective.
And perhaps itâs just my personal experience, but Iâve also seen warriors yelling at other classes for not playing ârightâ more than any other class. This may be because solo play is so much different from group play, but the bottom line is no one is paying $15 a month to be talked down to all night by a rude stranger.
Iâve spent time looking into the warrior class in-depth â enough to know I donât want to play one, and to understand some of the tactics involved in keeping a group alive. But my experience has been that many warriors donât have a working knowledge of how other-classed players want to play.
To emphasize â how other players *want* to play the game. They may know about shaman totems, frost nova mechanics, the nuances of a flash heal, etc., but they donât stop to think about how the other players want to use their characters in a group. In my mind, there is no one way to play a drill sergeant *cough* warrior and have the party be effective. The initial discussion should not be one-sided. Once the warrior has explained how he would ideally like things to go, itâs time for him to listen to how each player wants to contribute to the group, and for a middle ground to be reached. The end result will be a more effective dynamic in which all players are 100% invested and doing their best and having fun, and not just taking orders. A large part of being a warrior is being grouped, and so a large part of being a warrior is understanding the psychology of the other 90% of the people in the game, and how to work together with them. The ârightâ way to play a warrior isnât the only way, if most people donât want to play with you.
Of course I could be completely wrong (Iâve posted as much and been told such), which would just underline the fact that I never want to play in a warrior-focused group ever again. To each his own. But I think these two âfluffyâ subjects would be crucial components to any serious warrior guide you might design. Nuts and bolts are nothing if the machine you end up with is one no one wants to use.
This may sound a bit odd, but I think any warrior guide would be incomplete unless it were to include two always-overlooked aspects â communication and social interaction. Warriors need to learn how to communicate effectively with their allies, how to compromise with others' preferences, and how other people want to play the game. Bear with me â¦
Warriors, as tanks, tend to become the leaders of groups, or at least the callers during battle. Rarely, this role falls to the priest or the puller, but it usually seems to be the tank. (Keep in mind I'm speaking from personal experience, but it is experience.) A lack of communication between the tank and the rest of the group leads to huge misunderstandings when rule #1 (Things Will Go Wrong) comes into play. Everyone can know what theyâre supposed to do in ideal situations, but without knowledge of what to do when things are falling to pieces, everyone tends to fall back on their own individual survival template, which works against the group cohesion and tends to hasten the dismal end.
Hence, an essay on warrior communication should break down into three quick sections. First, the initial âlectureâ given to a new group to let them know what their expected roles are for maximized efficiency. Second, quick-key codes that can be typed during battle to signify specific actions and to let the group know what the warrior is doing / planning / thinking of doing. And third, how to keep things somewhat controlled when everything falls to pieces and group cohesion is threatened. The alternative (which unfortunately is the only situation Iâve so far experienced) is the warrior dying and blaming everyone else for being âstupidâ and letting their mind-reading skills go on the fritz, and for being "bad dogs" and not taking barked orders properly.
Which leads into the social part of things â¦
I understand that warriors are the keystone of high-level parties that are running instances. They are also the reason why I refuse to join any group that includes a warrior, ever. I donât like being yelled at, âschooled,â or being made to curb my play style to cater to someone elseâs âbetterâ way of doing things ... especially when that "better" way ends up giving me less treasure, less gold, and less experience per hour. Iâve been lectured by warriors on how to play a ârealâ rogue so many times that Iâve given up on them, and gone on to strictly solo play. I'm doing just fine, thank you, and I can afford better equipment at the AH than what you're wearing, with money left over, without having to roll for things against you that you don't even need. (Why did you need a leather chestpiece when you're wearing plate? Why? Why?!? And then you get furious when I compete for the one-handed sword, which I actually use when you're set on maces ...)
Ahem.
:blush:
Anyway. Maybe they know how a rogue should function in a warrior-controlled group, but that way not only conflicts with my play style, it also makes me weaker and less effective.
And perhaps itâs just my personal experience, but Iâve also seen warriors yelling at other classes for not playing ârightâ more than any other class. This may be because solo play is so much different from group play, but the bottom line is no one is paying $15 a month to be talked down to all night by a rude stranger.
Iâve spent time looking into the warrior class in-depth â enough to know I donât want to play one, and to understand some of the tactics involved in keeping a group alive. But my experience has been that many warriors donât have a working knowledge of how other-classed players want to play.
To emphasize â how other players *want* to play the game. They may know about shaman totems, frost nova mechanics, the nuances of a flash heal, etc., but they donât stop to think about how the other players want to use their characters in a group. In my mind, there is no one way to play a drill sergeant *cough* warrior and have the party be effective. The initial discussion should not be one-sided. Once the warrior has explained how he would ideally like things to go, itâs time for him to listen to how each player wants to contribute to the group, and for a middle ground to be reached. The end result will be a more effective dynamic in which all players are 100% invested and doing their best and having fun, and not just taking orders. A large part of being a warrior is being grouped, and so a large part of being a warrior is understanding the psychology of the other 90% of the people in the game, and how to work together with them. The ârightâ way to play a warrior isnât the only way, if most people donât want to play with you.
Of course I could be completely wrong (Iâve posted as much and been told such), which would just underline the fact that I never want to play in a warrior-focused group ever again. To each his own. But I think these two âfluffyâ subjects would be crucial components to any serious warrior guide you might design. Nuts and bolts are nothing if the machine you end up with is one no one wants to use.