PvE protection warrior is very viable as PvP main

[Ken]

Recently I started levelling a new character on a newly created 5th account: A protection warrior.
This character was created to make more PvE content more accessible. He has a mitigation protection build and 9770HP unbuffed at level 66 (which is 1500 more than my level 70 shamans with a few epic gear'ed items).
When I started running some Alterac Valley battlegrounds yesterday with that tank and my 4 level 70 shamans, I found out that this PvE character is VERY handy for PvP too. That's why I thought it would be a good thing to share these experiences on the forum:

Anybody who has encountered a multiboxer before knows that there is a main character that is followed by the others in that multibox team. This means that most people will attack this 'leader'. Having a protection warrior in place solves that problem greatly. My level 66 protection warrior can handle that amount of damage while my shamans finish off the enemie(s). In fact, this tank is only level 66 and he can survive better than the level 70 shamans. (I can't wait till he's 70 too!)

A second benefit is that your warrior has quite a few crowd-control features. He can stun, disarm and he can even fear people away from your shamans. Giving any melee DPS class a stun followed by a disarm will render them completely useless. The stun also prevents any class from running behind your characters, which makes casting for the shamans easier.

Another benefit is that you can taunt people so they are forced to attack the warrior instead of your shamans. This is not only handy against the AV NPCs, but also against regular melee opponents. and PvP pets.

I have only played this new setup in Alterac Valley though and I've only played 5 matches or so, so I might add more information in the future.

[Ajuga]

Another benefit is that you can taunt people so they are forced to attack the warrior instead of your shamans. This is not only handy against the AV NPCs, but also against regular melee opponents.

You can only taunt NPCs (including player pets).

Interesting strategy though ;)

[Naysayer]

Another benefit is that you can taunt people so they are forced to attack the warrior instead of your shamans. This is not only handy against the AV NPCs, but also against regular melee opponents.

You can only taunt NPCs (including player pets).

Interesting strategy though ;)Who knows, maybe the enemy players were like "WTF why is he taunting me?" and that gave him time to kill the enemy player.

[merujo]

Another benefit is that you can taunt people so they are forced to attack the warrior instead of your shamans. This is not only handy against the AV NPCs, but also against regular melee opponents.


ahahah this is so epic!

[gobtol]

Are hunter pets tauntable?

[Dominian]

Are hunter pets tauntable?

Only by aoe taunt i belive..

[Ken]

I stand corrected. Taunt and Intimidating Shout only work against NPCs and player pets.

[Ellay]

Intimidating Shout works in PvP, just not taunt ;/

[Mac]

maybe the enemy players were like "WTF why is he taunting me?" and that gave him time to kill the enemy player.

:thumbsup:

[cepheus]

You damn shaman multiboxer dont know squat about other classes than shamans :cursing:

jk :rolleyes:

Warrior aoe taunt is named Challenging shout.

Intimitating shout is the thing we boxers dont like, namely the aoe fear :)

[Trammel]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.

[Ken]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.

Thanks for the suggestion, I didn't realize that yet!

[shockernub]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.

You sir, are a meanie :thumbdown: X(

To the OP, enjoy your warrior pvp shouts/taunts if they make you feel better :thumbsup:

[Dominian]

Faced 4 shamans and 1 warrior in the arena today but im not sure if he controlled all 5 or just the shamans. He outgeared me by far...

his team http://eu.wowarmory.com/team-info.xml?r=Boulderfist&ts=5&t=ONAGI&select=ONAGI
My team doesnt show up since i made it today: http://eu.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Kazzak&n=Anilia

But i got pretty much the same gear apart from 3 pices of the blue pvp gear, with EM+CL he one shotted my main but i managed to ress and win over him even if he used aoe fear.

[merujo]

That's Jezperr, he control's 4 shamans. Welcome to the Misery battlegroup, we should meet sometime :P
soz 4 offtopic.

[shaeman]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.
He made one mistake. The rest of the information was accurate and based on his findings. I see no reason for your aggression towards him.

[mphuie]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.
He made one mistake. The rest of the information was accurate and based on his findings. I see no reason for your aggression towards him.

I wouldn't say its accurate. If you came up to a Warrior w/ shield and 4 Shammies, you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior. It's pretty silly to assume that since hes in front (by 2 yards?) that most people will attack him only.

[Jaws5]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.
He made one mistake. The rest of the information was accurate and based on his findings. I see no reason for your aggression towards him.

I wouldn't say its accurate. If you came up to a Warrior w/ shield and 4 Shammies, you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior. It's pretty silly to assume that since hes in front (by 2 yards?) that most people will attack him only.




I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.
He made one mistake. The rest of the information was accurate and based on his findings. I see no reason for your aggression towards him.

I wouldn't say its accurate. If you came up to a Warrior w/ shield and 4 Shammies, you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior. It's pretty silly to assume that since hes in front (by 2 yards?) that most people will attack him only.

First of all I run 1 War (main) 3 mages 1 holy priest. once they find out leader of your 5 man team they target it every time. If your l.ead has 20k armor and 15k heath and can deal with mages and casters a close range , you are better off. I will run with a Paladin in same grp. For pvp I prefer war in grp. PVE pal in grp.

Any one that pvps with 5 man knows that leader is always attacked first because he is in range first. hunters, range casters) :0

[Ken]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.
He made one mistake. The rest of the information was accurate and based on his findings. I see no reason for your aggression towards him.

I wouldn't say its accurate. If you came up to a Warrior w/ shield and 4 Shammies, you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior. It's pretty silly to assume that since hes in front (by 2 yards?) that most people will attack him only.

I wasn't claiming that it was accurate, that's why I didn't add anything to the wiki pages and decided to open a topic about it to get more input.
I can only talk from my experience, and that is that mostly my main gets attacked. Close-combat attacks are generally on one of the shamans(probably because melee classes know the difference between cloth and plate better :P), but most people don't dare to close-combat me because most are dead before they get to doing so. So, from experience it's accurate to say that opponents mostly attack my leader.

On the other hand, if they don't attack my warrior, it is also a benefit, since I can more easily micro-manage everything because I don't have to switch to another character as quickly. So either way it's a win.


you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior
Many people in battlegrounds *are* pretty clueless, but it's true that melee classes seem to tend to target the shamans more than they target the warrior.
"OMG he's AFK! Report him!" while you're on defense is one of my favorites, especially when you're the only one who captured and held a flag for the entire game.

[Dominian]

I hope that before the next time you decide to create a thread, proclaiming that you have knowledge of something (and potentially misleading others) that you actually learn what the hell you're talking about first.
He made one mistake. The rest of the information was accurate and based on his findings. I see no reason for your aggression towards him.

I wouldn't say its accurate. If you came up to a Warrior w/ shield and 4 Shammies, you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior. It's pretty silly to assume that since hes in front (by 2 yards?) that most people will attack him only.

I wasn't claiming that it was accurate, that's why I didn't add anything to the wiki pages and decided to open a topic about it to get more input.
I can only talk from my experience, and that is that mostly my main gets attacked. Close-combat attacks are generally on one of the shamans(probably because melee classes know the difference between cloth and plate better :P), but most people don't dare to close-combat me because most are dead before they get to doing so. So, from experience it's accurate to say that opponents mostly attack my leader.

On the other hand, if they don't attack my warrior, it is also a benefit, since I can more easily micro-manage everything because I don't have to switch to another character as quickly. So either way it's a win.


you've gotta be pretty stupid to start whacking on the Warrior
Many people in battlegrounds *are* pretty clueless, but it's true that melee classes seem to tend to target the shamans more than they target the warrior.
"OMG he's AFK! Report him!" while you're on defense is one of my favorites, especially when you're the only one who captured and held a flag for the entire game.

If your talking about battlegrounds everything is possible because 9/10 in a bg have no clue about teamplay or simply dont care..

Now go and 5 box your way to 2k rating and tell me how manny teams attacked tried to nuke your prot warrior.. Maybe some actually did before they bothered to look you up on the armory.

Bgs arent worth mentioning as the welfare epics brought in crap pve players ruining the fun for every pvper who used to enjoy bgs.

[Razman]

I have a 70 prot warrior in Heroic tank gear--undead for the funs of it. I will try this and its also common WoW myth that the best way to take down a multi boxer is to kill the brain. This gives us breathing room especially as theyre killing your tank. I played a hunter for a good while in the 70 BGs and you would be amazed at how many people even on 1v1 would try to kill my pet before hammering on me letting me have shot after shot for free on them. The fact that the OPs tank is getting smashed upon and not his shammys to me is no surprise at all.

Oh btw on CC a hunter can also fear other peoples pets ;-)

Warriors hamstring also has potential in this set up V melee types attacking your shammys.

[Ken]

Now go and 5 box your way to 2k rating and tell me how manny teams attacked tried to nuke your prot warrior.. Maybe some actually did before they bothered to look you up on the armory.

First of all: I don't like arenas. I only do them to get some 'free' points. Arenas too boring to me. I don't like the constant need of queue'ing, I don't like how gear makes such a difference and I don't like to fight in the confined space every time. I'm a caster, so I don't like pillers neither.

My startpost doesn't even mention arenas, it only mentions battlegrounds.
But I agree that in arenas it's not likely that the warrior is the first target, because arenas are usually much better organized(voice chat and all that).


Bgs arent worth mentioning as the welfare epics brought in crap pve players ruining the fun for every pvper who used to enjoy bgs.

So do you think that arenas don't contain 'crap PvE players'?
And why are 'crap PvE players' ruining the battlegrounds? Do you mean that those opponents aren't challenging enough?

Have you ever fought in blue gear against full merciless teams(e.g. +300spelldmg versus a +1000spelldmg team)? It's practically impossible to win from them, unless you have a completely braindead team in front of you. By giving the good arena players better gear and not giving a stick to the other players wouldn't be fair, because the better opponent doesn't only have more skill but also much better gear which makes it almost impossible to even touch him, let alone killing him.

Also, I think calling batleground epics "welfare epics" is elitist and derogatory.

[Razman]

Oh dear - can we not have the pve/pvp debate. Hopefully the changin of colours for pvp epics and pve epics will change this situation ;-)

[Ken]

Oh dear - can we not have the pve/pvp debate. Hopefully the changin of colours for pvp epics and pve epics will change this situation ;-)
There's always going to be elitists claiming that they're color is better than the others and that the way that how they play the game (whether that is [some type of] PvE or [some type of] PvP) is 'worth more'.

I don't mind replaying to the issues that were put down (because some were definitely interesting and worth discussing).

[Dominian]

Now go and 5 box your way to 2k rating and tell me how manny teams attacked tried to nuke your prot warrior.. Maybe some actually did before they bothered to look you up on the armory.

First of all: I don't like arenas. I only do them to get some 'free' points. Arenas too boring to me. I don't like the constant need of queue'ing, I don't like how gear makes such a difference and I don't like to fight in the confined space every time. I'm a caster, so I don't like pillers neither.

My startpost doesn't even mention arenas, it only mentions battlegrounds.
But I agree that in arenas it's not likely that the warrior is the first target, because arenas are usually much better organized(voice chat and all that).


Bgs arent worth mentioning as the welfare epics brought in crap pve players ruining the fun for every pvper who used to enjoy bgs.

So do you think that arenas don't contain 'crap PvE players'?
And why are 'crap PvE players' ruining the battlegrounds? Do you mean that those opponents aren't challenging enough?

Have you ever fought in blue gear against full merciless teams(e.g. +300spelldmg versus a +1000spelldmg team)? It's practically impossible to win from them, unless you have a completely braindead team in front of you. By giving the good arena players better gear and not giving a stick to the other players wouldn't be fair, because the better opponent doesn't only have more skill but also much better gear which makes it almost impossible to even touch him, let alone killing him.

Also, I think calling batleground epics "welfare epics" is elitist and derogatory.

My team is in full blue and yes i done my 10 games this week to get my points(dooing more with 400 spelldamage is pointless like you said)

The amount of players who dont care about the outcome and are only there for the "easy" gear. Belive me im not a fan of arenas either but im pointing out how brainded people are in bgs because the TOTAL lack of teamplay. Blizzard then forced us to do premade vs premade but the queues you get is crazy..

The reason WHY about evey spec is viable in bgs is because of the lack of teamplay and i cant say im elitist by saying that.. I cant see the downside by removing rewards when you lose like in pve when you wipe?? It would certainly make things more fun when people atleast tried instead of wandering around mindless like ALOT do.

When people attack your warrior with a shield it tells how much they know about this game and people like that deserve to lose each time if you ask me! :)

[Ken]

Now go and 5 box your way to 2k rating and tell me how manny teams attacked tried to nuke your prot warrior.. Maybe some actually did before they bothered to look you up on the armory.

First of all: I don't like arenas. I only do them to get some 'free' points. Arenas too boring to me. I don't like the constant need of queue'ing, I don't like how gear makes such a difference and I don't like to fight in the confined space every time. I'm a caster, so I don't like pillers neither.

My startpost doesn't even mention arenas, it only mentions battlegrounds.
But I agree that in arenas it's not likely that the warrior is the first target, because arenas are usually much better organized(voice chat and all that).


Bgs arent worth mentioning as the welfare epics brought in crap pve players ruining the fun for every pvper who used to enjoy bgs.

So do you think that arenas don't contain 'crap PvE players'?
And why are 'crap PvE players' ruining the battlegrounds? Do you mean that those opponents aren't challenging enough?

Have you ever fought in blue gear against full merciless teams(e.g. +300spelldmg versus a +1000spelldmg team)? It's practically impossible to win from them, unless you have a completely braindead team in front of you. By giving the good arena players better gear and not giving a stick to the other players wouldn't be fair, because the better opponent doesn't only have more skill but also much better gear which makes it almost impossible to even touch him, let alone killing him.

Also, I think calling batleground epics "welfare epics" is elitist and derogatory.

My team is in full blue and yes i done my 10 games this week to get my points(dooing more with 400 spelldamage is pointless like you said)
In my case it was about+350spelldamage if I recall correctly (last week). I had an epic pvp helmet, epic pvp shoulders and an epic pvp shield. All the rest were blue quest items and even some greens. This means I had absolutely no chance against any well-geared team I was facing (almost every team).


The amount of players who dont care about the outcome and are only there for the "easy" gear. Belive me im not a fan of arenas either but im pointing out how brainded people are in bgs because the TOTAL lack of teamplay.
I agree, battlegrounds are often "everyone for himself". I guess that's why I'm succesful there: My team works as a team and my gear kind of matches the average battleground gear(I guess).


Blizzard then forced us to do premade vs premade but the queues you get is crazy..
Yeah, it's rediculous.


The reason WHY about evey spec is viable in bgs is because of the lack of teamplay and i cant say im elitist by saying that.. I cant see the downside by removing rewards when you lose like in pve when you wipe?? It would certainly make things more fun when people atleast tried instead of wandering around mindless like ALOT do.
It would definitely be more fun to reward the people that diserve it(because it would be more rewarding in general), but it wouldn't work because the gear quality gap between good and average/bad players would grow even bigger.
A good example is enchanting en gems: Anyone with trucklloads of money could buy himself an advantage. So average players with quest blue gear have absolutely NO chance against average players with good gear and money.
But I didn't call you elitist for that, I did that because of the "welfair epics" remark.


When people attack your warrior with a shield it tells how much they know about this game and people like that deserve to lose each time if you ask me! :)
Hehe, indeed.

[ChaoticMonk]

This (http://www.murthpvp.com) guy is pretty awsome when it comes to prot warrior pvpin'...granted he aint mbing but still great :D

[MTB]

Another benefit is that you can taunt people so they are forced to attack the warrior instead of your shamans. This is not only handy against the AV NPCs, but also against regular melee opponents.

You can only taunt NPCs (including player pets).

Interesting strategy though ;)Who knows, maybe the enemy players were like "WTF why is he taunting me?" and that gave him time to kill the enemy player.

:D hahaha ...although imo ... taunt should not work in pvp as in pve but.. it should atleast give a random voice yellin' message to the target in pvp ...for instance to a robe wearer "why dont you loose that dress and come taste a real sword!" ...if the sound of it couldnt be killed unless killin the game sound... it could be annoying enough to get taunted every 6 sec.. mayb' even enough for the target to attack the taunter