The logic behind prot?

I fail to understand Blizzards logic of prot warrior at this point in time.
Is it suppose to be the ‘no mistake or die’ class of WoW?

As an example; it does not make sense why Ignore Pain is designed as it is.

This post probably sounds like a whine-post, but I’m honestly just trying to understand the purpose of the spec. Do we need to get better, or have they designed the class in an incorrect way?

The spec actually seems fine, when you play it almost perfectly, so maybe that is what they are aiming at?

1 Like

Prot warrior is still the best tank for physical damage, it can deal with physical damage better then any other tank.

Would you prefer to have ignore pain on the GCD like other tanks?
In bfa it was supposed to be the dps tank that could deal with physical damage really well and it became way too strong.

Even as it stands high mythic + pushers sort of expect prot warrior to become the answer later on in the expansion (this will ofc depend on other factors that is unknown right now)

Logic is just observing that something is there, like “oh, that’s a fire.” Emotion is “ARGH! MY HAND IS IN THE FIRE AND IT HURTS!”

Rationality is the mix of the two “if I remove my hand from the fire it’ll hurt less.”

The logic of Protection Warriors is that they’re by far best against physical damage so it’s okay they’re the worst against non-physical damage."

The rationality would be that “wait, most of the important damage is non-physical, so being the best by far against physical damage by far is bad when they’re by far the worst against non-physical damage.”

This is an emotional point made subconsciously out of fear to keep Protection Warriors largely unviable on average as the important damage is non-physical. And yes, Prot Warriors were used in the WFR and the players of those are a far outlier of the spectrum that makes up the average that it’s wild.

My point is, WoW is developed for the average, casual player. Almost every aspect of the game shows us this. For the tank role, VDH (and all other tanks really, except maybe BDK) shows us this, why then go the other direction with the Protection warrior?

What is the content, if they are aiming for the hardcore player, that this spec is supposed to be played for?
And if they aim for the casual player, are we suppose to stop playing at low keys and Normal raid?

This spec makes no sense, in these M+ times.

Raid damage as a tank is mostly physical in nyalotha sludgefist does a whole 100% physical damage to the tank.
It is more physical damage in nyalotha then it was in most bosses in bfa (i am going from memory here though) They were generally only about 40-60% physical.
After having gone through a handful of logs on sludgefist warriors take 1500-3000 less damage a second than other tanks at least on the top dps logs of warrior, but warrior does less DPS than their partner on those logs.

I am sure you thought prot paladin was a walk in the park in the last 2 expansions when in reality it had in many places and situations a play perfect or die and that made good and bad protection paladins very different from each other.
And then paladin has lower hp and lower armour than other tanks yet that is not happening to warriors now because you are just very good on physical not so great on magic.

Ironically this is the first patch where VDH is doing what the design goal was for them to be a great dungeon tank.

only time will tell where protection warrior will be later on, as it stands every single tank spec can do mythic raids and at least +15 in m+.

And for the rest of the fights? I find it something worth focusing on when a person only uses one sample. It smells too much like cherry-picking.

This is strawmanning. Reading between the lines, as I do on you to your argument, is okay. Putting an opinion that the person never ever even as much as hinted at between the lines is intellectual dishonesty at its peak. I can offer no charitability for this.

Intellectually dishonesty can be done either consciously or subconsciously. The first is intentional, the latter just happens as an emotional reaction to assert superiority.

There is this webpage that will tell you this.
But ok Shriekwing 85% physical, Huntsman 95% physical, Hungering 60% physical, Sun king 73% physical, Inerva 50% physical, xy’mox 75% physical, Council of blood 90% physical, Sludgefist 100% physical, Generals 60% physical, Denathrius 65% physical.

If you want more you can look it up yourself.

By saying this you yourself are using a strawman. You are aware of this right?
You use this line:

And that is the exact same thing as I did with that I was making it very clear I was making a comparison about now and the past.
I made the comparison based on the wording used of no mistake or die class of wow, used and explained how while prot paladin has looked at times very good in skilled hands the last 2 expansions in people that has not played well it was really bad. Meaning there has been specs that have had this in the past so it would not be anything new. It has just moved away from one spec to potentially another.

I can not be bothered to write a big text to explain something that should have been very clear from the moment you did read it, and I Know you picked up on that as you called it a strawman.

Then again I should have expected this from you after all you are Arcana the person who use the strawman fallacy more then actually talking about a subject.
(i say this not in bad faith i want you to be aware of what you are doing yourself as you try to push it on other people.)

Yes, I do want more, though it starts to look like something now, just because something is physical has no impact on it being negatable by armor. Bleeds are physical damage and non-mitigable by armor. Self-healing does remove the damage inflicted by it and IP mitigates it,.

You’re using the definition of strawman wrong. A strawman is literally attributing an opinion that the other person has never even hinted at expressing to that person. Me saying it in no way makes what I do a strawman. It’s just saying what you did. I do find it telling about your emotional state that you employed a defense strategy that’s essentially “I’m rubber and everything you say bounces of me and sticks to you.”

Reading between the lines what he said was just that other classes were more preferred because they’re easier and Warriors are harder than those.

The walk in the park is solely your interpretation of what he said that you then put on him as having expressed.

Your bias is intense and having written a UC BA that gave me extensive education in the scientific method as well as giving us a supervisor to ensure that any sort of bias was absent from the hypothesis, I feel like I have the skills to see that you have it in spades.

And what the structure of the words in this paragraph says, even without you being consciously aware of it, that you’re superior and I’m too inferior to even bother. That’s clear emotional response as there’s no rationally to back this up.

Then do your own research you are very fast to jump to conclusions you know nothing about, and if you do not know about tanking in the first place why are you talking on this thread in the first place I wonder oh yes I know because this is what you do.

Nope I am using the academic definition of the strawman fallacy, just because you do not know what it is, does not mean it is not the case.

I see the problem here you do not know what a strawman is you also do not understand what it is, now it makes sense.

Strawman very much so perfect example of you being a person who uses strawmans all over the place.

Says the person who uses something he can not possibly know anything about to make assumptions about a person who he has only interacted with in text.
Again Strawman.

Link Now to back up that claim. You are not trustworthy and you try to make claims here now that you need to back up.(keep in mind you are the one who is making this claim) (with proof of it) Also that does not mean anything in this context and is 100% irrelevant but you want to make it a big deal so you now should follow the scientific method and show proof.
Your bias is very telling of the insecurities you have as a human though, as you are making a claims left and right, do personal attacks and talk about things that is irrelevant to topics, you do this all the time and it is very telling of your psyche.

When people say that it’s always mean “come to the conclusion I want!” You made the argument so the burden of evidence is on you. It’s none of my duty to prove, disprove, or support your argument. I asked you a clarifying question. If you’re unable or unwilling to delve further then that just means that your initial argument is emotional and has no basis in objective reality, it only exists in your subjective reality.

A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person’s argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is really the claim the first person is making.
Source

This is the academic version, so you’re partly right in that I used it wrong, you’re just extrapolating based on your own bias. And saying that I use the straw man fallacy is wrong. You could correctly say that I was using the fallacy fallacy. Your argumentation is the essence of classic Conservatism of hierarchies, namely that you see yourself as superior to me.

For what reason? Whatever I link can just be dismissed as I could only back it up by stating my real name as well. In which case, I would essentially be doxing myself as my name is so unique that I’m literally the only person in the world with that combination of names making up my full name.

Because you are most likely a liar and why should i believe, you have done anything like that when you are not willing to link.

This is the default fallacies that you use everywhere:
Strawman, Personal attacks, and appeal to authority (and you are the authority).
Just like you claimed to have something you tried to use that as why you are right and i should believe you well, if you want to actually be believed you NEED to show proof.

I have shown proof you are not willing to accept the proof based on your own biases so the burden of proof is on you.
Why should I give more proof when you act the way you act?

Now now

I asked you about this so using your way of talking, As you are not willing to show proof your argument is emotional and has no basis in objective reality.

Now also

To answer your question you can find a link to the webpage used in every single discord for classes with a tank spec if you actually tanked anything you would know about the webpage and I would not and should not need to link anything to you but you are not here to talk about the topic at hand in the first place.

So i will not answer further as you are not willing to be objective you are here to pick a fight that is your sole reason to be on the forums. Your emotional state is bleeding hard and is easy to read.
You however have not been correct in any of your biased assumptions about me what so ever.

You should listen to your professor do not take a single thing as proof you will almost always be wrong.

oh the irony in this, and how blind are you about yourself?
I do not see my self as superior i simply do not trust a single word from you based on every single interaction I have had with you, as they are always just you doing a whole bunch of fallacies.
Not a single time have you actually gone for the argument you have always gone and made false claims about me that you can not possibly know based on the reality of humans and the reality of life and the reality of psychology.

Do you understand this how you act is why I respond to you in the way I do.

You are the one that felt the need to talk about it why bring it up if you are not willing to show proof? i know why you should know why by now I hope you learn why you should not bring it up.

You make this claim about me

This is what you yourself are reflecting and it ends up like you think you are superior to other people.
But at this point, I know this is just you having low self-esteem and that reflects back as you thinking people are after you, when in fact they are responding to how you yourself act.

Unlike you I do not make claims about my education on a games forum because it is none of your business and it is irrelevant to playing a game and talking about a game.

1 Like

blizzard logic behind prot war: git gud
DH hunter: i can keep kiting while keeping high dps and aggro.
Pala: infinite healing plus aoe and single target interrupt
prot war: A angry dude who is trying to keep aggro and don’t die

2 Likes

Paladin doesn’t have AoE interrupt, Avenger’s Shield only interrupts the first target hit fyi.

1 Like

Dude i have prot pally too ans it is a walk in the park in difficulty in comparison. I dont even wanna start on DHs. It is like a class made for action rpg rather than mmo

The logic behind this statement is that anyone who knows more than you have to be faking it. Let’s be honest here. The moment I said something against you nothing I said would be accepted as that in your subconscious mind would be the same as admitting inferiority to me.

And no, I’m no authority, I just know more about behaviour than you, and you know more than me about your chosen field and if we were discussing that I would default to you knowing more than me. We’re just different. The name of the fallacy implies a superior/inferior dichotomy as you can never have an authority without the authority having someone they can have authority over.

NO, you only showed proof based on what you can see, which makes it anecdotal, I provided an example of physical damage that’s unmitigated by armor. You presenting evidence that all of the physical damage in CN is mitigable by armor would be proof.

As I said I would be doing myself. Which would be against the ToS. If I did provide a link you’d just say that was fake and inadequate as evidence as at this point your confirmation bias is that what you say is correct. And phenomenologically you are, everything someone experience is correct, for them. And then you apply theories and such to the phenomenon to avoid being just another “yes-man.”

Cool, that means nothing to me as I asked whether the damage was mitigable by armor. I know that the damage from Meaty Fist is just a lazy copy of the damage that the first tank receives so that’s unmitigable. Meaning that the Warrior has to be the first tank in order to reduce the damage the second tank takes. Etc.

As I said, you made the claim so you have to go more in-depth. It’s your job to make your argument sound of all criticism.

Considering that in my view everyone is different and no one is superior or inferior I would say that I can see quite well. You never even tried to make areal argument you just went straight into a “I’m rubber and you’re glue” defense. That automatic and emotional reaction says a lot. If it came from a place of rationality you’d point out specific instances of me being wrong in my interpretation instead of saying this that sounds like an argument and is none.

The word is “projecting.” “Reflecting” is thinking deeply over something. I can find no better evidence that you’re entire series of posts is just emotional ramblings based on your own experiences and a view of “the grass is always greener on the other side.”

I can confirm this- Tanking on a Vengeance DH is by far the easiest and less stressful tanking I’ve ever done in the 15 years I’ve played WoW.

Are you talking now? because I am not talking about right this second I am talking of the past expansions.
And even if you talk about the past if you found it easy that does not mean it was as can be easily shown if you talked to a random set of healers on how tanks feel like in the various expansions.
But I can give a concrete example of a situation when paladin had to play perfect or die kil’jeaden in Legion you needed Shotr or cooldown up for every time but you could not do that and needed outside cooldown to actually be sure normally, if you however played it perfectly you could do it as a port paladin but it was hard.
I did not mean to point fingers just simply that this is nothing new it might just be that port warrior is in that spot right now using what you say.

Other than for historical value past expansions have no meaning or value at all since we’re living in the present only, and in the present it’s SL and in SL Prot Warriors are rock bottom. The objective reality of them being M+ royalty in BfA has no influence on the deserved value of their present state.

And if you believe it has you really need to get your beliefs checked as they’re flawed beyond belief.

The logic behind your statment is that anyone who knows more then you have to be faking it.

So I see you have no memory of the past when I have admitted to being wrong about things from you.

And yet you tried to pass off something as if you are the authority that is what makes it what it is, only now after I have called you out on it did you say this note that.

I will make a response with something you just said

Because this is literally you right now.

WRONG my proof is widely accepted from top people in wow.
You will have to disprove the proof if you are going to make that claim.
I have given you more than enough information for you to look it up yourself just because you are not willing to do so does not make the information anecdotal at all what so ever.

And if you played a tank you would know about it and would not make a big deal about it.

I never made this claim you made this claim that I made that claim you see the strawman you made there now?
You just provided proof of your strawman ways.

You did not ask that you asked about physical damage I would assume it is mitigated by armor as the webpage is made for tanks and what to expect from the damage profile of the bosses, but there is also an auto attack number that is going to be mitigated by armour.

But again cool strawman.

You want to know why? because I was not making an argument in the first place you where so emotionally attached that you saw me saying that protection paladin has had that happen to them in the past so it is not surprising that it happens to other classes (a comment that was not Ever directed at you in the first place) as an attack on you.

And yet you act like you are superior based on nothing other then you making claims about another person state based on words not in their own language nor do you know anything about them something that is so elementary to the field you claim to be a part of that I know you are not part of it simply based on that.

You know far too little about the subject to make any claims that is a fact.
Even a trained professional would have to little information to say anything and that is where your downfall is in your claims.
You might fool some people but to me you are just a sad person.

In this whole thread, the only argument you have made is that not all physical damage is mitigated by armour That is it.

1 Like

Did you just forgot to write something or are you juvenily repeating what I wrote?

The past also has no say on your current behaviour. If you see someone who’ve donated to charity before kick a dog you’d think that was horribly behaviour. If you temper it with “oh well, they did something good in the past” then something is severely wrong with the way you think.

We live in the present and the present behaviour means a lot more than the past.

And no, I never tried to pass something off as an authority on things. I laid out my credentials as I hoped you would at least listen to reason. If you’d defer to someone with an education within quantum theory you also have to defer to someone with an education on human behaviour. Anything else is a display of hypocrisy where you’re able to admit that someone else knows more about something you know absolutely nothing off, except what you’ve gained from pop-cultural osmisis, and unable to admit that someone else knows more about something you feel you should be an expert on. You’ve no knowledge about human behaviour, you’ve only knowledge about your own behaviour, and even then you’ve only knowledge about the conscious interpretations you make.

And now you’re using the “NO U!” defense without any claims to back it up and just saying it. If I am you can easily show a quote of me doing so AND your reason for thinking that I did. “NO U!” has no value.

Saying that other people who’re on the top agree with you is an appeal to authority and an appeal to a majority. Both of which are literal fallacies. And with the former, you accept their authority while at the same time dismissing that the notion that I could have more knowledge than you on the subject. This is cognitive dissonance and clear hypocrisy.
This is the M+ ranking of 1/13/21 from Icy-Veins
M+ tank rating.

This is the projected CN Mythic tank tier list from 12/24/2020m, as that’s the most recent data list I can find.
CN tank rating
The first has them pretty much as the worst. The second has them as B-tier, though that means less when tanks are only divided into A and B tiers.

So these rankings are legit, you saying otherwise can only mean that you disagree with the authority you used to bolster your claim and that would be inconsistent with your statement about the top players supporting that stance.

This is what you said

In this context, it clearly means that all physical damage is mitigable by armor. This is objectively false as there’s physical damage that bypasses armor mitigation. Bleed is just one example. You then followed it up with

Further reinforcing the notion that you think default that all physical damage is lowered by armor when this is provably false.

And no, I see myself as and act from the notion that we’re all different, you’re the one interpreting me as acting superior as that’s what you’re biased to see. I know that I’ve no such underlying motive or thought in my behaviour as I once was around a person with such a serious case of mirror-identity that they had no identity of their own and they were forced to figure out their identity as I gave them nothing to reflect. So I know everything you see in my behaviour is coming from your own interpretation.