|A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed in order to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved.|
"In melee combat, A warrior should always beat a druid."
Sounds like the author never had to fight a feral druid specialized into tanking. --Pai 08:29, 5 August 2006 (EDT)
- Or never dealt with Nature's Grasp from a casting Druid. That is an asinine, somewhat elitist statement. Dirkbronze 13:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
"Defensive Spec'd warriors - a risky but potent strategy is to aggro additional mobs. In defense stance with decent gear, mobs do very little damage, but generate extra rage. The downside is that you can't bandage to heal after a concussion blow."
And this sounds like poorly thought out theorycraft. Letting mobs hit you is in effect giving your opponent a boost in dps equivalent to that of the mobs on you. Unless someone can provide more details and reasons as to how giving opponents a boost in dps is a potent strategy, I'm going to vote for its removal. Ajm 06:36, 28 December 2006 (EST)
Shadow Priest Edit
About Warrior VS Shadow Priest, I think the opposite of what is written (Having played both at 70 to 1900 in arena) a warrior should ALWAYS beat a shadow priest, they can stance dance our fear for the same CD, and can render Mind Flay useless with a carefully timed MS or Whirlwind, I think it should be looked at again. --Shiryo 11:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Especially now that fear from a SP basically does nothing to anyone....Mind Flay is worthless due to short range and having to stand still...so basically...once we blow our fear...we're dead Acecow 14:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
"Ignore totems, especially if you are arms spec. It is not worth wasting an entire swing of a slow weapon for a crappy totem. They do not cause a great deal of damage, though the earthbind totems are a pain, so long as you have a hamstring on him you are both equally disadvantaged. That swing you could use on a totem is much better off critting him for about 2000 damage than trying to mitigate a few hundred from a fire totem."
^I have to disagree with this...to a point. Warriors have a fantastically great way to take out totems quickly, easily, and cheaply without wasting a big slow swing. Waiting for a white to kill it is a waste yeah... but totems have all of 5 hp if I recall correct. Almost any hit will take them out. That includes a 10 rage, spammable, instant attack we get that deals a tiny bit of damage as a secondary effect. It's called hamstring. Using hamstring you can take down a totem in a second or two. You can actually, if you're really really good, take down two totems between swings of a really slow weapon. Or take down an entire four totem fort in less time than it takes for two whites. Graptor 11:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Yea totems have about 5-10 hp...but couldn't you just TC if you're close to a few? Acecow 14:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Thunder clap is a AoE effect, and totems are immune to those. they'd be absolutely useless if they weren't after all.--Shishi 17:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Could you cleave them? Acecow 13:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- No. Previously multi-target and AoE effects would hit totems, but blizzard patched it so they aren't hit by any ability that isn't specifically targeting that totem. Used to be I could wipe out most of a fort with one whirlwind. You actually have to target the totem to be able to hit it. Meaning if you wait for whites, you end up taking on the order of 12 seconds to kill four totems with a slow 2h. Hamstring fixes that little problem. Graptor (talk) 05:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Lots of changes Edit
I made lots of changes in most of the tactics, since i found most of the information hopelessly outdated and defeatistic! Any comments and changes would be appreciated!
This article reeks of poor theroycraft, situational advice and long since defunct ideas. I'm going to work on a much more general and sound strategy guide.
- A rewrite would be much appreciated. Seems as though each section is either "run away--you'll lose" or "you'll always beat this class with mortal strike." I hate to make assumptions about the author, but he or she doesn't seem to be someone who has played the class enough to understand its nuances. Dirkbronze 13:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
The paladin, warrior and priest sections definately need some improvements. I personally edited a lot in the rogue/hunter/mage/shaman sections and believe them to be valid tactics in most arena-situations. If anyone disagrees i'd like to discuss it further :) Krigskoen 13:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Added cleanup tag Edit
After reading through this article and reading the comments here, I thought it was appropriate to add the cleanup tag. Any PvP article should have commentary more thought out than "mount up and run away" for facing each opposing class. I also believe that commentary like "one should always beat x class" leads to poor tactics and overconfidence.
There are also a couple of areas of ideas that are at odds with one another. For example, carrying a 2H weapon prevents the warrior from dealing spell interrupts (requiring a shield) at low-levels. Pummel isn't available until 38. So, a warrior that carries a 2H weapon for mortal-strike is vulnerable to casters and cannot interrupt as the article would suggest until level 38.
There seems to be a general mish-mash of high-level and medium-level tactics here. Can that be separated out? Maybe a discussion in the introduction on what a lower-level warrior can expect and cannot do in the following document?
Dirkbronze 13:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)