I never said that Dreadnought was unviable or even said that AM was too good. You’re assigning an argument to me that ridiculous in order to look disproving it. That’s literally making a strawman argument. And if that’s the level where you’re at nothing you say can be taken serious.
look, it’s right here in this thread, you saying that arms is just a test of might window, which by contrast, is an anger management build, because test of might is not that good without it and vice versa.
You even say it in the context that you require that trait even.
I probably did and just because something is worse it no way makes it unviable, it just means that the other option is better. And for your specific argument I remember it as being someone else who made that in reply to your assertion that Arms has amazing Talents, which is also wrong since those Talents are often needed in order to make the spec even work, which means that they’re false choices and should just be incorporated in the spec and replaced with choices that were actually interesting.
I see things as relative, you see things as absolutes. One of them is indicative of a higher societal function as only children and minds in arrested development sees the world in absolutes.
Thank you for confirming my point in that you are in fact, in the view that other things are not viable.
Last time I saw this amount of delusion it were in supporters of a certain politician that has objectively done the opposite of what they subjectively think he’s done.
You never read my post, you just skimmed it, saw the word “viable” and reached your own conclusion since the thing I say in the post is the opposite of what you say I said.
You really do see the world in absolutes.
You quite clearly just posted that saying:
but then immediately follow up by saying:
How does that make other choices unviable? It just means that taking something else is considerable less effective than taking them, that in no way make them unviable. It’s absolute thinking to think that one word is synonymous with another when they have neither correlation nor causation with each other.
Without absoloutes, the world itself would not exist so i suggest you abandon that train of thought before you make yourself go insane.
Anyway, you can not have a viable “false choice” because you are implying that you do not have a choice but to take 1 option, which would, in effect make both of the other options unviable.
Physics works in absolutes, gravity is an absolute value after all as it happens regardless of how you interpret it.
Words are relative as they require someone to interpret them to even have meaning.
Conflating one with the other reinforces the notion that you have an abolute viewpoint.
Words have a limited number of meanings, this in turn makes them absoloute as if you have correctly communicated your point then there cannot be any misunderstanding regardless of wether a word has more than one meaning or not. Individual words are used as part of a greater whole, sentences and paragraphs and it is this whole that gives them an absoloute definition.
If you mean something different then correct your use of words, it is your fault if you use a bad sentence to get your point across, not other peoples fault.
Words have many meanings determined by the context and sometimes the meaning of the word is in the sentence without being stated, if I say “massive incompetence in the face of a disaster” most people would think of the occupant of the White House, and the language it’s used in.
It does explain a lot that you have such a limited view of and about language. You must have struggled in school when it came to interpreting texts.
You must have a very low opinion of yourself if you have to resort to insulting me every single post, it is simply uncalled for.
Rather than making an actual point you have just devolved this into nothing but throwing insults towards me for no apparant reason.
How about getting back to the actual topic rather than pushing something that nobody reading this thread actually cares about?
1 Like
I see you have met Arcana, the most opinionated warrior around. My suggestion is to stop arguing and move along.
I mean, you can complete ny’alotha raid while naked and let everyone boost you. You can play sub-optimally and probably do mythic too.
That doesn’t make you any less of a tool for not playing optimally. Yes, its your choice but it is objectively speaking a dumb choice all the same.
I see you have never met the full time Polyanna Ritihel.
Rithiel has a lot of opinions on Warriors and how they should be designed, one of them that everything is fine right now and that Warriors have never been better, especially Arms. Rithiel has also only played Warrior for a year and completely lacks the experiences from the other expansions. So yes, Warriors, and Arms in particular, is the best as they have ever been if the only point of comparison is Warriors at the start of 8.0 and Warriors at 8.3.
technically i did also had a max level draenei warrior in whirlwinds of draenor.
What I pay attention to is the “technically,” which I can only interpret as meaning “I had one at max level in WoD and I never played it.”
Except I’ve never insulted you. You just see any criticism as an insult to you. Which makes it impossible to argue with you.
I’ve played this Warrior since Vanilla. I have more points of comparisons than you do so I’m highly insulted by someone with one year of experience telling me that they know everything about how Warriors work. You only have one, maybe two, point of comparisons, I have eight, do you honestly think that what you say have any merit to me when I have experienced objectively superior versions of the Warrior in general and Arms in particular?
What you’re doing is no different than the new employee whose only been there for a month telling those that have been there for years how they can perform better if they just do this one thing, except they already tried it in the past and find it utterly annoying that someone without any experience is telling them “just do this thing and all will be good!”
Your understanding of how statistics works is also flawed and that informs your thinking.
Dreadnought is a horribly designed Talent because the qualifier to use it has no Bad Luck protection on it (Tactician). Sure, you might have over 40% for it to work and that only affects your Success Outcome of Yes being chosen out of Yes/No 40% of the time. This is dependent on the sample size.
Out of a thousand chances to activate it 40% will be Yes. Out of a 1000 chances that gives 400 procs. There’s nothing to indicate that the chance for Yes to happen will happen 40 out of 100 times. You can get 0 out of 100 and then 80 out of the next 100 and you still have the 40% success chance shown in the statistics. Except this outcome has a severe impact on your overall DPS. Using it also decreases your ToM window.
Ravager has the condition of the target having to stand still when it’s used in order for you to get the full effect. Else that’s a DPS loss, which means that you might have to wait to use since X is about to happen. And waiting is overall also a DPS loss.
Anger Management has a qualifier that goes into effect regardless of what you do if you play normally. It also allows for ToM to take effect more often so there’s a synergistic effect there. As opposed to the other two on the line there are no situational qualifiers. There’s no requirement for Tactician to proc for it to work and there’s no standing still requirement of the target to get the maximum effect out of it.
As opposed to the other two AM is stable and predictable and none of the flaws of the other two Talents will go away in SL according to the first pass. Tactician still has to proc for Dreadnought to have an effect and the target still has to stay in the AoE for Ravager to have any effect. That people like Preach et al. practically gush over Ravager shows how used they are to Arms being garbage. There’s nothing different in their behaviour to an abused spouse with Stockholm’s Syndrome that thinks everything will be better from now on due to their partner being nice to them.
They can play anything they like on the Alpha and it would make for great preparation for the real thing. And Preach has stated that he’s likely to go Arms on live. He says one thing and he never actually plays a warrior in any of the streams I’ve seen other than the Warrior one. Instead he’s actively playing pretty much every other class. In this case, actions speak a lot louder than words, saying that you want to do one thing and then never doing it shows that subconsciously you have no faith in what you’re saying.
The current system is trash. It’s the exact same system that was in place in 8.0 only with better numbers which still makes it trash only less so. The only time it was worse was in Legion with the over reliance on CS and even then Arms had greater party utility than it does now.
The best version of Arms was back in WotLK when MS was a Rage Builder instead of a Rage Spender. Which meant that you had an active impact on your playstyle instead of just being passive as it is now.
I’ll make an analogy where passive generation is allowance and active generation is earned income as provisional pay.
You have no attachment to allowance because you have no emotional investment in it as you’ve done nothing for it other than existing.
Earned income you have an emotional investment in because getting it is directly proportional to your own performance. The better you do the higher the income.
Arms has a Rage-allowance and it comes every Auto-attack period which is reduced by Haste that increases the frequency of which you get your allowance, In between that period you can only spend your allowance and if you run out then you have to wait until your next allowance payout. And completely arbitrary you then get more because something happened that you have no control over by you making a critical hit. Since you have no control over the process then you’re unable to get invested in it. The only part that’s fun is spending since you do have control over what you spend it on.
If Arms had their Rage-generation moved to an active system then it would be earned provisional income as your performance had an effect on how much you got. By making your performance matter you now have control and if you have control then you have an emotional investment in the outcome.
Some people like the current iteration of arms and that’s fine. Some people like past iterations of arms and that’s also fine. It doesn’t matter how many reference points you have. People are entitled to their opinions on what they enjoy.
Also, shadow priests and destro locks both have mortal strike effects in fel fissure and psyfiend. This adds to the amount of comps using some type of mortal strike effect. They can be countered but they are there.
It has nothing to do with like. It has to with that the design of the WotLK Arms was objectively better than anyone that followed as explained in the studies and writings about the Zone of Proximal Development and Neuro-plasticity regarding engagement and creation of such (if you want to go deeper into this see the Client Centrered Model of occupational Therapy and also read some stuff about Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)) simply due to the fact that Arms had an active Rage-builder. This is a case of you being objectively wrong according to all sources that’s adjacent to cognitive psychology. Can people like bad design? Yes. Is bad design still bad design regardless of someone liking it? Yes.
A lot of people like veteran cars despite them being objectively death traps from a design perspective with the lack of seat-belts, the hard metal, and the utter lack of crumble zones.
If everyone has it then to quote Syndrome, “if everyone is special no one is special.” It’s also a good argument for removing it in it’s current iteration from almost everyone, give some Classes a heal absorb version on a semi-longish CD, and make it just a default effect in organised PvP.
It has everything to do with like. It’s a video game
I didn’t know that I could be wrong by just saying people are allowed to enjoy some things that others don’t but ok, I guess I’m wrong about something somewhere according to you.