DV you make some interesting points, and I appreciate you taking the time to put them into words.
Although I can't go point-by-point on what you said, and indeed I do agree with a number of the points you made, I did want to emphasize two quick comments, both on the subject of perception.
First, you make the valid point that I agree with that more FOTM players are flocking to prot warrior because of the -perception- that they are OP... regardless of whether they actually are. This is an important distinction I think, and speaks a lot to the motivations of the majority of players. As you said, for most players if they think the "point" of playing (in quotations for as much as any game can be said to have a "point") is to make the biggest booms, then they'll be attracted to whatever class and spec seems to have the biggest boom tool at that time.
However if the "point" of playing is seen as maximizing your honor points per hour--a very pragmatic perspective, I admit--then a class or spec's place on the OP Scale would be seen by how they contribute to that effort, and how out of balance their contribution is. I've often said, damage is certainly not the most important attribute in a battleground, it's just the most visual one. When I'm on my hunter for example, I spend the BG peeling and CCing and generally supporting the war effort, and while I certainly don't have top KBs or damage to brag about at the end, I always sort the scoreboard by Honor Gained, and if there's more blue on top than red, I feel like we have "won".
My frustration lately with warriors--by which I mean all warriors, not just prot--is that they contribute so little to that war effort other than damage, as compared with other classes. And let's be honest: plenty of other classes can do as much or more damage per minute than any spec of warrior, it's just that shield slam offers the greatest burst which is good for making people dead despite healers. However I don't think that ability turns games nearly as often as being able to heal a FC without losing health or mana, or to run the flag across the field effectively immune to CC. In other words, while prots can do a lot of instant damage, so what? It doesn't affect the outcome of the game nearly as much. And note that to this day I still haven't one-shotted anyone.
My second point on the subject of perception addresses the very original assertion itself, which is that people are "flocking" to prot warriors because of the perception that they are OP. What if the very idea that people are flocking is itself a misperception? Are there really that many more than there were before, or is it possible that this is a trick of perspective? Sort of like when you get a new model of car, you start noticing how many other of the same model are on the road... you just didn't possess the perspective to notice them before.
There was an interesting study many years back in the Pacific Northwest regarding a mysterious force--some believed it to be rampant acid rain--that was damaging people's windshields. An article had run about a person who had noticed micro-pits in their windshield's glass, and the article speculated that it was due to an increase in the local rain's acidity. The story caught fire, and thousands of citizens started reporting that their windshields had the same damage, and they collectively demanded an investigation into the cause. The truth, of course, was that such damage to windshields is perfectly normal from sand and dirt from normal driving, but nobody's attention had been drawn to it before, so for years they literally looked right through it.
I have seen games with 7 hunters in them before during Cata (and no, I was never one of them) and more currently I have seen games with 6 or 7 paladins. I have yet to see a game with 7 warriors.
And most importantly? If there -were- a game with 7 warriors in it, that side would
lose. Terribly. Sure they might be able to get several kills by tag teaming SS's with another warrior, but a warriors abysmal mobility and crowd control would allow the opposition to 3-cap in short order.
In conclusion, I don't think there's a lot of difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying. Essentially, good players know that many warriors = bad for the business of winning. I think we're just reaching different conclusions about what it all means, and about what impact they are having on the game.
For myself, it feels more constructive to continuously break down the illusion of a prot warrior's OP-ness, from a game-winning and honor-earning perspective, so as to set a good example for other players, perhaps lurking board members, to consider. That's my gig, other people's interests may certainly vary.
Apparently, I had a lot of words in my head that wanted out.
Edit: Here is a link to the perception incident I mentioned above.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Windshield_Pitting_Epidemic
)
