Discussion in 'Level 10-19' started by worldoftears, Jan 7, 2019.
Taking Notes i'm sorry ol'mighty twinker, spoken like a player who knows his prioritie's.
Vid of a 1v3 plz
If u play fury just reroll rogue you pussy
He is a Lvl 20 as if that is at all relevant to this bracket.
Pugs can be fine for warriors, but lets not kid ourselves. When the games become more close, or in terms of wargames even, warriors just fall behind a lot of other classes. Just how it is.
This is why people dont say that warrior is good. The definition of good in this community does not mean fun or viable in pugs or viable with the right set up. Good means war games meta. The meta in this patch is nearly immutable and it does not have space for warrior. That is why you will not find anyone backing warrior as a good class here no matter how many charts you post or games you win.
If you define good as pug viable and fun then yes warrior is good. If you define good as should take one to a war games match over hunter, then no warrior is not good.
My main is a rogue xd
A very small percentage of the people that post here actually give one flying **** about any low level wargames. Don't make it sound like its the majority...its the minority by far. That is also the reason the advice from wargamers is often so terrible is that they make suggestions simply based on being able to compete in the meta that Blizzard has set up for them... not the meta that most people actually play the 19s (pug stomps and running into other random premades). The builds they suggest, the tactics they suggest are offen just dumb for pugs... they think that wargames gives them more/better insight into being better at low level... it does not... in fact its the opposite... they are two completely different jobs. You don't ask the janitor that cleans the toilets to suddenly go cook the hamburgers.
So keep killing people with your warrior... and have those same people keep telling you how bad it is.
I disagree. Any time lists of viability are made on this site they are organized by war games viability. Any time a class is spoken about it is compared to the meta classes and then dismissed. The op asked y people here say warrior is bad the answer is absolutely because warrior is not mm hunter or balance druid. Note that i never said that warrior is bad. I play pugs all the time and I play warrior all the time as well as a myriad of off meta stuff. I only answered the question of why people say that it is bad.
Tbh is ur having fun then play it and don't worry about what ppl say here. I will be surprised though if you change anyone's mind about class power no matter what you post.
I don't have to change the mind of the original poster or any other warrior that pugstomps with heals... they already know that the warrior is viable in pugs. This entire post is based around a pugstomp and a warrior being shown as good... not in a wargame. The viability of anything in a wargame is not relevant as 99% of all actual games played in the 19 bracket are pugs. And I would even say that 99% is probably too low an actual number. Only a tiny FRACTION of actual 19s give a crap about wargames... or in reality even know that people actually que that shit... stop fooling yourself.
You are honestly referring to a group of 20-30 people that know each other from wargames versus the entire rest of the community that just have 19 twinks, are in guilds, and only pugstomp... and as I said before are even aware that there is a secret micro community that ques wargames at 19.
Now, it appears to me what you are doing subconsciously is making the FALSE assumption that all people that que wargames are magically better than the rest of the people who pug 19s... that is your mistake not anybody else's... and I'll wait for-****ing-ever for you to show one shred of actual empirical data that's shows otherwise that is not related to just the amount of games played (which shows nothing other than somebody plays a lot) or little kids running off at the mouth.
Side note: If you weapon swap in Pugs and que with heals and take warmachine to close distance/generate rage (I'm not talking about an entire wargame team just focusing you down.. sure that can happen to anybody.. does not happen in pugs)... and you are not top dps/kills all the time, you are just bad. Nothing at the pug-19s can compete with multi-Crusader... as long as you are alive and stacking those procs you can kill other twinks instantly... I dont care about their gear... if you roll up on an arcane mage with 4 crusader procs up he gets turned into dog food in 1 second. And the multi-stack warrior is also the 1 class in the 19s that can actually outdamage heals once you pass 2 crusader procs. Now again, most people don't weapon swap, even the ones that say they do... and you can just tell by the end chart numbers... this also DRASTICALLY effects the warrior at the 19s level... more so by any other class doing anything they can do, but don't do.
You know the op's question was why no one SAYS warrior is strong right? You might find it frustrating that this community specifically frames things around war games, but it does. If you think I am the guy trying to push down off meta styles you havnt looked at my other posts. I have said nothing to disparage pug play or off meta builds.
I guess I have to tell you what I am saying and what I am not since you have several times mistook my meaning.
The question - Why did nobody tell me that warrior is good?
My answer- this community over prioritizes meta classes and warfare viability. That is why you will have a hard time finding that viewpoint well represented here.
Implications- my comment was primarily a simple answer to the question but also a critique on how the community views the game in a very limited way.
Your response suggested that THIS community (not 19s in large but the people on this forum) are not concerned with meta class ansd warfare viability. I disagree.
Things I did not say.
Warrior is bad
People who play off meta are bad and wrong.
The only people who know how to play this game and bracket are on this site.
People who play war games are better and more skilled overall.
Cliches that vouch for you on this site is the only or truest indication of skill.
I am a pretty pretty princess.
Hope that clears up my points a bit.
the majority of the people people that have even read this thread are not all die hard wargamers... not saying they have not done one in the last year... but again... that is not "the meta"... just because the site was designed for that does not mean that is what it represents... it is currently just a data base for people asking questions about how to gear/play/grouping or people just wanting to epeen flex off of pug stomps... not wargames... reading though any brackets forums will clearly show you that, depending on how fast you can read. Are there a few that still try to overemphasize wargames for gearing and strategy sure... and most of the time I will stipulate... they are the same... sometimes BiS is just BiS... and having pocket heals is having pocket heals.
Separate names with a comma.