WoW Stratics IRC Chat

[Quark]

The entire transcript can be found on http://wow.stratics.com/

Here's some tidbits I found interesting:

Brannoc: *nv* From the CM's replies on the forums regarding the diminishing role of priests in the current game content (PvE and PvP), we're led to believe there is going to be future review of priests. Can you provide us any insight on the changes that could be a possibility?

Kalgan: Well, i think some of the diminishing role of priests had a lot to do with the power of the illumination talent. With 2.1 there are some significant balance changes that should improve the role of healing priests in endgame content regardless of the fact that it wasn't the hpm/hps of the priests themselves that changed significantly.

Kalgan: It also had something to do with the power of the shadow spec. ;]

Confirms they followed the "addition by subtraction" line of thought: nerf the two biggest reasons healing priests weren't being brought.

Brannoc: *Grogzor* With the changes to encounters in TBC and the development of KTM threat meter, Safe DPS is not as important as it was 2 years ago. Also, many raids are dropping down to 1 or less hunters with only MD in mind. Tack that onto the most difficult method of DPS in the game, the buffs given in 2.1 seem to be nice but they will not be enough to bring hunters back into raids so my question is...What are you going to do to save the hunter?

Kalgan: We'll keep ratcheting up hunter raid dps as needed.

Kalgan: I do still think there's value in "safe" dps regardless of threat meters. It doesn't change the fact that hunters have the potential to be less threat limited than other classes.

Not much to add ...

Brannoc: *Halal* Was it intentional that cloth armor at level 70 provides less damage reduction than did cloth at level 60?

Kalgan: Yes. In fact all types of armor provide less mitigation at 70 than they do at 60, it isn't specific to cloth at all.

And yet mobs have more mitigation than at 60. Strange beast.

Brannoc: *Mazrael* With the advent of multiple tanking classes in The Burning Crusade, Paladins and Druids are now competing for the role of main tank in 25-man raiding content, extending from Karazhan up through the Black Temple. Has WoW development reviewed the game mechanics of Crushing Blows? In 2.1, the Glancing Blow mechanic has been changed to assist DPS classes - has any similar discussion been undertaken for Crushing Blows

Kalgan: Yes, we have had a similar discussion regarding crushing blows. We feel they add too random an element for players in endgame content.

Kalgan: We expect to deal with this issue at some point in the future (although it may not be immediate)

This is huge. This is the number 1 issue that makes warriors the "tank" class above all tank classes, something that simply couldn't be changed by tweaking class skills slightly.

[Artega]

I was under the impression that Paladins were the lead "uncrushable" class, but that they weren't being used due to lower base HP and virtually no "OH SHI-" buttons.

[Kevin]

The cloth armor giving less mitigation always cracked me up when I heard it. My mail wearers lost about 10% or more mitigation as well going from 60 to 70. It was all so that plate mail and shields (which got big armor boosts) would be more valuable as best as I could tell.

The crushing blow changes I think is good. I'm glad they agree that it is just too random and unfun. It's the biggest blow to druid tanking as well. Paladins can get there if they work at it, and if they do, they stay uncrushable more readily than warriors, but with a lower life pool, and no real tricks.

I still think most of the issues with hunters is in itemization. The next is oddball synergy, I still think you fix that by having some buffs that don't affect hunter now, unleashed rage, battle shout, etc, affect them as opposed to really changing the hunter core but that's me. This would fit in with how they are helping priests by nerfing paladin healing. Something that I don't have a problem with. Nerfing one class to make another class relatively stronger hasn't really been an issue for me. It helps avoid some of the power creep issues that they put a pretty decent clamp on in TBC.

I'm interested in how future shaman and pally tuning will work that they mentioned.

I like that there will be more 10 man content.

I don't mind the current keying processes, but then again I love 5 mans. But I can see how it could be annoying for some folks and play style so them cutting down some of that is a good thing.


I'm just looking forward to seeing 2.1 in action finally. There is a pretty wide set of changes. Unfortunately for me there is some stuff in heroics and elsewhere that my slower play pace means I won't see pre-nerf. But i did get to see most of it. The 55 minute heroic Shattered Halls being one of the big exceptions.

[Taelas]

I was under the impression that Paladins were the lead "uncrushable" class, but that they weren't being used due to lower base HP and virtually no "OH SHI-" buttons.

Not entirely correct. Warriors favor slow hitting bosses, paladins favor fast hitting bosses. Paladins rely on a proc mechanism to become uncrushable (combined with a spell they have to activate). It's not impossible for a paladin tank to reach 55%+ miss/block/parry/dodge altogether, and at that moment, they begin pushing off crushing blows simply by proccing Redoubt. They need combined ~40% avoidance to start pushing them off completely with both spells, but that's not hard. Warriors only need 25%, though.

Paladins are perfectly able to become uncrushable, and depending on the proc rate (which is supposedly 10%, though I have heard different accounts), they might do it more reliably than warriors.

And paladins have the most fun "oh shi-" buttons on tauntable bosses, even if only for ~3 seconds.;)Divine Shield + Righteous Defense.

[TheDragoon]

Paladins are perfectly able to become uncrushable, and depending on the proc rate (which is supposedly 10%, though I have heard different accounts), they might do it more reliably than warriors.

And paladins have the most fun "oh shi-" buttons on tauntable bosses, even if only for ~3 seconds.;)Divine Shield + Righteous Defense.

Actually, raiding Paladin tanks usually do not rely on procs to push crushing blows off the hit table. Most of raid tanking is currently tuned to deal huge spikes of damage when *no* crits or crushing blows are landing. When those are allowed to land at all, they are usually the death knell to the tank. Sure, you might survive some of those big hits if you can't get rid of them all, but at some point there will be a burst of damage that will knock out the tank without any possible way for the tank or healers to compensate. Any non-zero random element like that usually means a wipe given the long duration boss fights that the game has, currently, thus it become imperative that you completely mitigate all chance of being crit or crushed. Therefore, paladins end up having to grab all of the block/dodge/parry/miss that they can (they need a combined ~68% plus the +5% shield block libram) to make sure they don't have to rely on procs (hence why many feel Redoubt is pretty close to useless as a talent for raid tanking). That's what you should compare to the Warrior's ~28% requirement to negate crushing blows. :)

Also throw in the fact that there will basically always be a period of time when Paladins are crushable as they go to refresh holy shield (its duration is equal to its cooldown whereas a Warrior's shield block has a longer duration than cooldown) and I think it's safe to say that Warriors are the class that has the best capability for dealing with crushing blows. Even if they do get hit by it, Last Stand and Shield Wall are viable options for them to survive. The Paladin shield pales in comparison since it basically means the boss is going to turn and insta-gib whoever has secondary aggro.

[Bolty]

Confirms they followed the "addition by subtraction" line of thought: nerf the two biggest reasons healing priests weren't being brought.

Eh, yes and no.

Shadow Priests are just too useful for sheer utility, despite the nerfs. Ok, so they won't rock the damagemeters now, but the incredible utility of mana and health regen combined with Silence (when applicable) makes them worth having. Along with the fort buffs, of course, if no Holy Priest is present. I read so many posts in forums about how this group did such-and-such raid encounter without any real mana issues (e.g. Ilhoof, possibly Karazhan's most mana-intensive fight) and only find out later that they had a Shadow Priest along. Having a Shadow Priest turns a chain-mana-pot-chugging, double-innervate fight into a no-potion, no-innervate fight.

You're still missing two gigantic reasons why Paladins are still preferred. Paladins are stackable. The buffs and utility they provide stacks, such that having 2 or 3 healing Paladins along is always better than 2 or 3 healing Priests. Blessings rule. Of course you want one Priest for Fort and Divine Spirit, and any raiding Holy Priest worth 2 cents will have Divine Spirit. But why would you want more than one, considering players of equal skill level, when a second Paladin brings another Blessing to the table? That's Kings AND Salvation for your DPS'ers, Kings AND Wisdom for your healers, etc. It's similar to why Hunters are getting the shaft now; there's just little reason to bring them other than Misdirection. Priests have great group heals! But...how often do they get used in a raid, in such a way that they're considered critical? Netherspite, perhaps. Especially when Prayer of Mending from two Priests actually get in the way of each other and cancel each other out...

There's still this big perception out there, especially amongst non-healing-character players, that Priests are the golden children of raid healing. This is based on 5-man healing experiences where Priests do rule, yes. It just doesn't carry into raiding as well. Do you want Priests? Yes. Do you want 3 Priests or 1 Priest and 2 Paladins? Assuming equal skill level, you're nuts if you want 3 Priests. Of course, since "equal skill level" never really exists, that comparison just doesn't come into play in Real Life.

Okay, Paladins will have to drink mana potions now because they can't heal forever. They'll get to experience my nights in Kara where I down 10+ potions a session. Priests didn't want Paladins to get nerfed, we wanted to get buffed.

The other big issue is that Priests are made of glass. We die. Easily. You know it, you've seen how much I get creamed despite heavily favoring Stamina on my gear unlike Mooncloth-geared Priests. Nightbane is the most obvious example, but there are scores more.

Of course all this applies to raiding only. 5-mans is a different story. Except...that in heroics, if I pull healing aggro on something, I can take 2 hits tops. Fighting Kargoth last night gave me the heebie jeebies because, being cloth, an unlucky string of Blade Dance on me and I'm dead. If he can (and did) erase a Warlock from full health to zero in one Blade Dance, despite said Warlock hiding in a corner at max distance, having a Paladin doing the healing ceases that worry.

I could get into the PvP issues of how little survivability we have, but meh. The armor nerf plays a role in that too, along with an ever-increasing list of ways to counter fear - our only escape ability.

And of course we have the worst 31 and 41 point talents in our primary tree out there, which has also been beaten to death. Priest aficionados can tell you about how we have never, in WoW's history, had a must-get end-Holy talent. The theories abound, with the most popular being that Blizzard can't figure out a 31 or 41 point talent that doesn't "break WoW" in that it would just about require you to have a Holy Priest around. But yet they design tanking such that Warriors have that luxury.

I realize I'm viewing the world through my Priest-centric glasses and that I'm QQ'ing. But the fact still remains that I'm nerfed from pre-TBC days and I know it. And Priests know it. And Blizzard's response is to buff Circle of Healing by 25 heal and reduce the mana cost of Binding Heal. Oh boy.

If Blizzard came out and said "look, we felt you guys were too powerful pre-TBC," I guess I'd be okay with it. But it just seems like they don't understand. I'd hope the recent posts from Armory-mined talent selection data shows them just how few Holy Priests actually spec deep in their "primary" tree...and I say "primary" in jest because healing Priests have never had a primary tree. We've always been a fairly even split between Discipline and Holy, unlike every other healing class that goes deep into one tree.

Priests need some whiz-bang utility or a heal that's more than a gimmick (Lightwell, Circle of Healing). I don't think it can be done without breaking PvP. One great summary of the overall problem I read once is that Priests have too much *default* utility. Out of the box, we get:

Hot: Renew
Big Heal: Greater Heal
Fast Heal: Flash Heal
Instant Save or Pre-Buff: Power Word: Shield
Utility Heal: Prayer of Mending
Group Heal: Prayer of Healing
Utility Heal: Binding Heal

What more could you add to that which doesn't completely break balance? Nothing that I can think of. So Blizzard adds, via Holy talents:

Holy Nova: instant cast, heals some and does damage without causing threat, but costs way too much mana
Lightwell: portable bandage bucket, but if the player takes any damage at all it cancels the effect
Circle of Healing: ranged group heal, castable on other groups, but all players must be ridiculously close to each other, and once again group heals just aren't that useful in raids compared to direct heals

All of these are highly, highly situational gimmicks that a large majority (shown via Armory datamining) of healing Priests don't bother picking up - since we're forced to, due to highly useful healing/utility talents existing in the Discipline tree!

Prayer of Mending should have been the Holy 41-point talent, not Circle of Healing. Not that I'd want Blizzard to do that, since they seem dead-set on forcing Priests to choose between raid utility (Divine Spirit, Improved Divine Spirit) and 41 points in Holy. Which is also incredibly frustrating. Why are no other healing classes forced to make such a choice?

-Bolty

[Taelas]

Actually, raiding Paladin tanks usually do not rely on procs to push crushing blows off the hit table. Most of raid tanking is currently tuned to deal huge spikes of damage when *no* crits or crushing blows are landing. When those are allowed to land at all, they are usually the death knell to the tank. Sure, you might survive some of those big hits if you can't get rid of them all, but at some point there will be a burst of damage that will knock out the tank without any possible way for the tank or healers to compensate. Any non-zero random element like that usually means a wipe given the long duration boss fights that the game has, currently, thus it become imperative that you completely mitigate all chance of being crit or crushed. Therefore, paladins end up having to grab all of the block/dodge/parry/miss that they can (they need a combined ~68% plus the +5% shield block libram) to make sure they don't have to rely on procs (hence why many feel Redoubt is pretty close to useless as a talent for raid tanking). That's what you should compare to the Warrior's ~28% requirement to negate crushing blows. :)

Why exactly would they require a total of 103% to push off crushing blows when 100% does it just fine?

Anyway, you're right; I completely forgot that.:)

Also throw in the fact that there will basically always be a period of time when Paladins are crushable as they go to refresh holy shield (its duration is equal to its cooldown whereas a Warrior's shield block has a longer duration than cooldown) and I think it's safe to say that Warriors are the class that has the best capability for dealing with crushing blows.

You're forgetting an important point: The durations of these abilities are determined solely by the attack speed of the boss involved.

If the boss has a 2 sec attack speed, Shield Block will not block every third hit even when spammed. Holy Shield will not block every fifth hit.
If the boss has a 3 sec attack speed, Shield Block will block every hit, and so will Holy Shield... and it even has a charge left when the duration runs out.

So no, they don't.:)Paladins (who have stacked avoidance till 65%+ as well as the +5% block libram) are more reliable in a crushing blow situation.

[TheDragoon]

Why exactly would they require a total of 103% to push off crushing blows when 100% does it just fine?

It depends upon the baseline that you're looking at. I was assuming more than 100% because bosses will generally be +3 levels so they get +15 weapon skill which gives 4x0.6%=2.4% (miss, dodge, parry, block) more mitigation required => 102.4% ~ 103% (I rounded up). :)

If you already account for the higher level bosses, then you would say 100%. However, I figure it makes more sense to base it off of what you read on the character screen (versus an equal level mob) so I go with the higher number.

You're forgetting an important point: The durations of these abilities are determined solely by the attack speed of the boss involved.

I didn't forget, I just discount it because few mobs fall in that category, as I recall. If you're talking about *really fast* attacking bosses, then warriors will still win due to higher life total (more leeway) and more predictable avoidance (shield block can be used twice as often as holy shield so there are shorter periods of time when you're susceptible to crushing blows). If you're talking about moderate speed mobs, Paladins will generally not run out of charges, but they still have substantially less life, fewer panic buttons and they have much more draconian gearing requirements than warriors. Oh, and paladins can't really push off crushing blows while in resistance gear, take more spell damage, are susceptible to silence, can be rocked by mana burns, and cannot spell reflect; those are additional strikes against them.

So I guess if you separate mitigating crushing blows from everything else in the game, Paladins might actually be better for those two or three fights with really fast attacking bosses. But if you take it as a whole, they really don't compare well to warriors, as currently implemented. :(

[oldmandennis]

Really fast attacking bosses can't also be the ZOMG crush one rounders (I'm pretty sure). It'd be too much pressure on the healers.


Priests are a bit odd. Everybody is supposed to have 3 trees, but what exactly is the point of discipline. How is it supposed to play different then holy? Or if you were redesigning the class, how would discipline play different then holy?

Warriors are in somewhat of a similar boat - what's the real difference between arms and fury in PvE supposed to be? And arms is so massively overpowered in pvp it really distorts everything else.

Survival also gets a bit of the "what's this here for" treatment.

Back to pallys, the conventional wisdom is that they are the king's of the AOE tank world. The problem with prot pallys is that the big bonuses for going deep prot all relate to single target tanking, which dev's have said (and I agree) is for prot warriors. If raids were still 40 it might be ok to say "there are some AOE pulls that you just can't do without a prot pally" the same way a couple of encounters forced having multiple hunters along. It would require altering the bottom part of that tree to effect AOE tanking. Alternatively, you could have a deep prot talent that boosted blessing of sacrifice to a useable level (as far as mitigation). This could make it really attractive to have a paladin "co-tank". However it would be difficult to balance without making the co-tank required. And I don't know how fun it would be to just cast BoSac and watch big red numbers appear over your head. And 25 man raids are already too full of hybrids trying to get out of healing. I suppose if you had a full time prot pally, you could cut back to one feral, and have a HT druid.

[Artega]

I didn't forget, I just discount it because few mobs fall in that category, as I recall. If you're talking about *really fast* attacking bosses, then warriors will still win due to higher life total (more leeway) and more predictable avoidance (shield block can be used twice as often as holy shield so there are shorter periods of time when you're susceptible to crushing blows). If you're talking about moderate speed mobs, Paladins will generally not run out of charges, but they still have substantially less life, fewer panic buttons and they have much more draconian gearing requirements than warriors. Oh, and paladins can't really push off crushing blows while in resistance gear, take more spell damage, are susceptible to silence, can be rocked by mana burns, and cannot spell reflect; those are additional strikes against them.

So I guess if you separate mitigating crushing blows from everything else in the game, Paladins might actually be better for those two or three fights with really fast attacking bosses. But if you take it as a whole, they really don't compare well to warriors, as currently implemented. :(

Spell Reflection doesn't have much use in raiding, or so I've heard. I've only done a small amount of raiding with my warrior, but I recall spells hitting me just fine even when I was using it.

As for running out of charges, we just got a talent to double the number of charges (and increase the damage dealt, too. Yay more threat?)

My major beef with how my Pally tanks versus my Warrior tanks is that I have no real escape buttons if something bad happens. I CAN bubble, taunt, and then kill the bubble after the next heal lands, but that's not really a feasible option for Heroic or raid tanking (as mentioned, the boss you're tanking will proceed to go on a rampage through the melee DPS during the couple of seconds you're bubbled), and Lay on Hands is on a very long timer and completely drains your remaining mana. Granted, I can still do a fair bit with 550 MP, but it won't last long.

I would like my Pally to be a competitive tank with Warriors, but I also feel that Warriors should be the ultimate general-purpose tank, given that they don't have buffs, heals, or dispels like I do. Basically, I'd like for it to be possible to swap in a Paladin tank for a Warrior tank (in a 25-man setting; we all know that any of the three tanking classes can tank Karazhan perfectly well) without completely screwing the raid over. Should it be a little easier and a little safer with a Warrior? Yeah. But I don't think that having a Pally tank should mean auto-wipe, either:(

[Bolty]

Really fast attacking bosses can't also be the ZOMG crush one rounders (I'm pretty sure). It'd be too much pressure on the healers.

Prince Malchezaar has a "thrash" attack that strings 3 hits together in about 1 second. All three have the capability to crush. Maulgar can Arcing Smash and crush hit also in the span of less than a second. In both situations, an undergeared tank just literally dies in a flash, and no healer can save them. Romulo, before he was nerfed into a joke, did an absolutely unreal amount of damage with the Daring buff.

These are extreme boss examples. Of course, these are also the bosses where I'd want a Warrior tanking over anything else. Note that our raid force has already beaten Maulgar with a feral Druid tanking him, however.

-Bolty

[Alrin]

Spell Reflection doesn't have much use in raiding, or so I've heard. I've only done a small amount of raiding with my warrior, but I recall spells hitting me just fine even when I was using it.

Sadly this is true. Spellreflect in its current incarnation is barely situational. The change they made in taking it off the GCD is a step in the right direction but right now its a novelty. It will reflect most 5man dungeon caster-spells that are either direct target or a volley-type spell, "true" aoe spells are not affected (obviously).
But for pretty much 99% of spell-damage outside 5mans, be it heroic or normal it may as well never have existed.

Spells punch right through the shield, no effect whatsoever.
I may have been that they felt it was entirely too strong (esp if the reflected spell counts as the warriors own threat, which I don't know if it does) but either way in just about all big situations where spell reflect may have felt like "oh wow now would be a great time to have it" it doesn't work.
And no, reflecting Attumens %miss-curse doesn't count ^^.

[Taelas]

It depends upon the baseline that you're looking at. I was assuming more than 100% because bosses will generally be +3 levels so they get +15 weapon skill which gives 4x0.6%=2.4% (miss, dodge, parry, block) more mitigation required => 102.4% ~ 103% (I rounded up). :)

If you already account for the higher level bosses, then you would say 100%. However, I figure it makes more sense to base it off of what you read on the character screen (versus an equal level mob) so I go with the higher number.

Point well taken.:)

I didn't forget, I just discount it because few mobs fall in that category, as I recall. If you're talking about *really fast* attacking bosses, then warriors will still win due to higher life total (more leeway) and more predictable avoidance (shield block can be used twice as often as holy shield so there are shorter periods of time when you're susceptible to crushing blows).

No, because Holy Shield has twice as many charges. If we base it on a 1 sec attack speed, the warrior blocks 33% of all blows (the first two out of six), the paladin blocks 40% (the first four out of ten). The paladin favors fast hitting bosses more than the warrior does, looking only at crushing blows.

If you're talking about moderate speed mobs, Paladins will generally not run out of charges, but they still have substantially less life, fewer panic buttons and they have much more draconian gearing requirements than warriors. Oh, and paladins can't really push off crushing blows while in resistance gear, take more spell damage, are susceptible to silence, can be rocked by mana burns, and cannot spell reflect; those are additional strikes against them.

So I guess if you separate mitigating crushing blows from everything else in the game, Paladins might actually be better for those two or three fights with really fast attacking bosses. But if you take it as a whole, they really don't compare well to warriors, as currently implemented. :(

Oh definitely. While paladins are more reliable with regards to mitigating crushing blows, they fall far short on pretty much every other point, and warriors perform well enough with regards to crushing blows that they hardly take more damage when compared with a paladin. While the paladin is capable of tanking now (which he really wasn't prior to TBC), he is definitely the weakest tanking class--despite the fact that he boasts the best defense against one of the most crippling boss mechanics in the game. He simply gives up too much.

[Taelas]

These are extreme boss examples. Of course, these are also the bosses where I'd want a Warrior tanking over anything else. Note that our raid force has already beaten Maulgar with a feral Druid tanking him, however.

A Feral druid tank is generally superior on the Maulgar fight over a warrior due to Maulgar's pure physical attacks. Only his regular attacks can crush, all of his specials can't. A warrior mitigates crushing blows primarily through pushing it off the table, while a Feral druid soaks it through armor... and the latter works on the specials as well, whereas Shield Block doesn't. The encounter is perfectly viable with a warrior tank, but a Feral druid tank should, at least in theory, take significantly less spike damage.

[TheDragoon]

Sadly this is true. Spellreflect in its current incarnation is barely situational.

Yeah, it's clearly a niche skill. I brought it, mana burn and silence up because, from what I read, there are quite a few situations in Tempest Keep where the mobs use either mana burn, silence or a really big magic attack that needs to be reflected (or absorbed by a Druid's superior life pool). I think it's really sad that there are encounters where the game basically says "Paladins need not apply." At any rate, they are no more niche, generally, than those encounters where a paladin might tank better than a warrior... the difference is that warriors can still do pretty well in those situations where they aren't *quite* as good and paladins basically sit on the sideline. :(

At any rate, I think crushing blows are obviously an out-dated mechanic that doesn't really add any fun to the game. People just use their knowledge of combat mechanics to try and not take them. Since only two classes (Warrior and Paladin) can negate them and only one of them can do it easily (Warriors) it seems a really stupid artificial block against the tanking ability of the other classes.

I'd really like to see tanking become more of an open activity like healing. All have distinctly different flavors yet they can all get the job done fairly equally. This is in a stark contrast to tanking which has an artificial block to ensure that Warriors are top of the heap in basically every situation. They should either remove crushing blows, given paladins and druids a better ability to handle them, or put it on a different combat table so that you can't abuse blocking to mitigate them.

[TheDragoon]

Point well taken.:)
No, because Holy Shield has twice as many charges. If we base it on a 1 sec attack speed, the warrior blocks 33% of all blows (the first two out of six), the paladin blocks 40% (the first four out of ten). The paladin favors fast hitting bosses more than the warrior does, looking only at crushing blows.

Here's my reasoning. Let's step through 10 seconds of tanking for both a warrior and a paladin with the 1 second attack example.

Warrior:
t = 0: Warrior activates Shield Blocks
t = 1: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 2: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 3: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 4: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 5: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow) and activates Shield Block => Repeat
t = 6: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 7: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 8: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 9: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 10: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow) and activates Shield Block => Repeat

Paladin:
t = 0: Paladin activates Holy Shield
t = 1: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 2: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 3: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 4: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 5: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 6: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 7: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 8: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 9: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 10: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)

In the first case, the Warrior blocks 2 attacks, takes 3 hits (chance for crushing blow), blocks 2 attacks and takes 3 hits (chance for crushing blow). In the second case, the Paladin blocks 4 attacks, then takes 6 hits (chance for crushing blow). Clearly, the second case is more likely to have a longer period of spike damage than the first. Since spike damage is the danger of crushing blows, the second case is clearly more dangerous.

[Taelas]

Here's my reasoning. Let's step through 10 seconds of tanking for both a warrior and a paladin with the 1 second attack example.

Warrior:
t = 0: Warrior activates Shield Blocks
t = 1: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 2: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 3: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 4: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 5: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow) and activates Shield Block => Repeat
t = 6: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 7: Warrior blocks an attack
t = 8: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 9: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 10: Warrior gets hit (chance for crushing blow) and activates Shield Block => Repeat

Paladin:
t = 0: Paladin activates Holy Shield
t = 1: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 2: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 3: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 4: Paladin blocks an attack
t = 5: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 6: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 7: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 8: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 9: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)
t = 10: Paladin gets hit (chance for crushing blow)

In the first case, the Warrior blocks 2 attacks, takes 3 hits (chance for crushing blow), blocks 2 attacks and takes 3 hits (chance for crushing blow). In the second case, the Paladin blocks 4 attacks, then takes 6 hits (chance for crushing blow). Clearly, the second case is more likely to have a longer period of spike damage than the first. Since spike damage is the danger of crushing blows, the second case is clearly more dangerous.

You're stacking the situation in the warrior's favor.

Add five seconds and suddenly the paladin's the one on top.

And, uh, how can the warrior activate an ability thrice that has a 6 second cooldown in an 11-second period?

[TheDragoon]

You're stacking the situation in the warrior's favor.

Add five seconds and suddenly the paladin's the one on top.

Not really. 3 crushing blows in a row is a lot less of a problem than 6 in a row as far as spiking damage goes. It gives the healers time to top off the Warrior before he takes the next potential burst. 6 crushing blows in a row means the healers better be really on the ball or it's game over. :)

And, uh, how can the warrior activate an ability thrice that has a 6 second cooldown in an 11-second period?

Easy, it has a 5 second cooldown and a 6 second duration (with improved shield block).

[Taelas]

Not really. 3 crushing blows in a row is a lot less of a problem than 6 in a row as far as spiking damage goes. It gives the healers time to top off the Warrior before he takes the next potential burst. 6 crushing blows in a row means the healers better be really on the ball or it's game over. :)

Easy, it has a 5 second cooldown and a 6 second duration (with improved shield block).

Ahh. Yes, that's the cinch. In that case, they're about equal in terms of damage taken from crushing attacks (2 attacks blocked with a 5 sec cooldown versus 4 with a 10), but the warrior a.) won't take them all in a row, and b.) will take less damage due to Defensive stance.

You're right, the warrior's clearly superior.

[Brista]

You're right, the warrior's clearly superior.

I don't think fans of paladin and druid MT viability should get too excited because Kalgan states later:

<Brannoc> *Shanaya* What is the developer vision on the subject of "pure" and "hybrid" classes? Are pure classes supposed to be better than hybrids in their specialized role? Tanking for a warrior, healing for a priest, magical dps for amage, physical dps for a rogue.
<Kalgan> Generally speaking we want "pure" classes to perform better in their primary roles, with hybrids coming close, but providing additional group utility to offset their reduced primary role power.
<Kalgan> Some restrictions apply, your mileage may vary.

This is annoying on several levels

First it isn't true

Primary tank: done best by Warrior (true if you accept the very debatable contention that Warriors are a pure class)
Primary raid dps: Warlocks and Shadow Priests (so not true)
Primary two-role classes: Priests and Warriors with the pure hybrids considerably worse (not true)
Primary healer: still Paladins (not true)

So it is clearly untrue for three out of four roles and since you can't really describe WoW Warrior as a pure punchbag class with no dps option not even true for tanking

They are still playing the game of telling the community that there are three viable end-game tank classes in the process of being tuned and telling the Warriors that they'll always be advantaged over the other two

It's cheap and dishonest

Next it's a dreadful way to run WoW. People like WoW because every class is interesting. Because there are no pure classes except dps ones. However for most people several classes are now becoming boring after you've levelled them up. I've taken both a Paladin and a Druid to 70 now and they are so much more fun before you hit 70 when you can do everything than at 70 when not only must you choose between being a second-rate tank who only gets to tank when there's no decent Warriors around or a healbot but also once you raid as one role you accumulate gear to enhance that role and can't effectively role-swap any more.

Working on my Warrior now having tried Lord of the Rings Online but not really got enthused. WoW has become a tide-over rather than something I'm really fired up about.

I would be much less frustrated if they decided what class roles we all should have at end-game and implemented it then stuck to it.