[Dhalphir]

For those who are going to be making their second spec a DPS spec, for encounters that require only one tank, I'd recommend sticking with Deep Wounds as your Prot spec, it provides the best balance of threat and survival.

[shiz98]

!Heroic Strike just toggles the ability on - a normal macro would work like this:

Macro -> Heroic Strike on
Macro -> Heroic Strike off

Wheras with !Heroic Strike, it only goes on:

Macro -> Heroic Strike on
Macro -> Heroic Strike off

I'm not actually clear on why this works (! macros seem like voodoo to me - very specific usage in all cases I've seen them), but it does - I've tested it. I used the Revenge/HS macro when levelling, along with the glyph, but would run into issues because I like to hammer stuff until it comes off the GCD; this would make the HS toggle something of a crapshoot. Using a macro like this allows you to basically hammer away at that one button like the Warlocks of yore.

#showtooltip Revenge
/cast Revenge
/cast !Heroic Strike

(You may or may not want to include /startattack at the end)

[shiz98]

Err, that should be

Wheras with !Heroic Strike, it only goes on: Macro -> Heroic Strike on Macro -> Heroic Strike on

[Rhyseh]

Source: Dhalphir For those who are going to be making their second spec a DPS spec, for encounters that require only one tank, I'd recommend sticking with Deep Wounds as your Prot spec, it provides the best balance of threat and survival.

I agree with Dhalphir in this case.

In regards to the two tanks specs vs 1 tank 1 DPS spec:

I think it really comes down to your role within your guild. Lets face it although it isn't neccessary 90% of guilds will still have an MT, the reasons for this may vary greatly it may simply be because this is the guy who turns up to every raid without fail, it may be that he is the best geared and therefore easy to heal or it may be that he is simply the better tank. The point is that most guilds still have a MT, for this guy two tank specs is a must. It allows him to minmax not only his gear but also his threat. If you aren't this guy and tanks rotate on progression content, then you are going to want to go with a Deep Wounds/DPS spec.

Cider has also stipulated a fair few preconditions for this spec: You need another warrior to apply sunders, the fight needs to be such that the focus is on your threat not your survival if survival is of importance you will not take this spec, AOE tanking will not be required and lastly that you are the MT. If these preconditions are met then this UA build will be ideal as a second spec, as an OT this would be a waste of a dual spec.

So in conclusion you need to weigh up what impact this will have on your raid before taking the plunge with this spec.

[Kytana]

Should be interesting to see new guild drama when dual speccs come out. Personally i made a warrior to tank, and while i have a full fury set, its extremely boring. I actually fall asleep at times while dpsing on my warrior. Gonna feel teh waters the first few weeks with a prot/prot specc and once people start to complain or call me selfish, then i guess i will respecc or play an alt to dps

[silversmain]

i wasnt sure what my duel spec was going to be but im now sure its going to be the ua spec

[cudmaster]

What is the point of Shield Mastery and Gag Order in this build?

You can take the 4 from those, put one in Last Sand, one in Vigilance (or one in juggernauht if you prefer), granted you'll need to figure out somewhere else to get a few points into prot to get down to IMP DEF Stance, but since this is a damage/threat build (that does NOT rely on hitting stuff with your shield, or reflecting damage with Damage Shield), getting something like IMP Disarm, or maybe putting a few points into IMP Disciplines (to use Recklessness more!) would seem more logical to me anyway.

Talent Calculator - World of Warcraft

[Beatzz]

hmm for a 3d zerg would this spec work, or is it more safe to go with standard DW?

[treyu]

My question is this, this builds looks good, but in other words, you want to focus on higher avoidance gear for the most part? which would ideally solve the problem with warriors where, we don't scale as well when our gear gets better. So correct me if I am wrong with that.

Another thing, your saying that deep wounds build won't be the most common spec any more in 3.1? What would you suggest then? going deep into fury? while only picking up HS / parry in arms?

[Beatzz]

Source: treyu My question is this, this builds looks good, but in other words, you want to focus on higher avoidance gear for the most part? which would ideally solve the problem with warriors where, we don't scale as well when our gear gets better. So correct me if I am wrong with that. Another thing, your saying that deep wounds build won't be the most common spec any more in 3.1? What would you suggest then? going deep into fury? while only picking up HS / parry in arms?

This spec is only being suggested for threat sensitive fights and as a second spec. The main DW spec would be superior in progression fights.

[Halgreg]

In terms of using two tank specs, use what works well for your guild culture. As a raid leader and guild tank captain, I wouldn't allow any of my tanks to have dual tanking specs because it limits that character to only tanking, and it's not a good position to be in when you've got a dedicated warrior tank relatively useless in a fight because he's got two protection specs, and, say, the druid or DK or Paladin is chosen to tank the encounter because the fight favors that class's mechanics. I'd say most experienced Guild Main Tanks know they won't be tanking all the time.

Unless things have changed drastically in Ulduar, a standard warrior protection spec should probably be able to handle every tanking situation. Even with that in mind, say we had 3 tanks in a raid, with Tank A's tanking spec weighing heavy into single target threat, Tank B's tanking spec leaning towards survivability, and Tank C's tanking spec being your standard Tanking spec, it's common sense to can swap out each Tank's specialty for the appropriate tank for the fight. Unused tanks can therefore still be very useful and contribute decent DPS in a DPS spec.

[treyu]

Source: Beatzz This spec is only being suggested for threat sensitive fights and as a second spec. The main DW spec would be superior in progression fights.

main dw?

[Beatzz]

Source: Halgreg In terms of using two tank specs, use what works well for your guild culture. As a raid leader and guild tank captain, I wouldn't allow any of my tanks to have dual tanking specs because it limits that character to only tanking, and it's not a good position to be in when you've got a dedicated warrior tank relatively useless in a fight because he's got two protection specs, and, say, the druid or DK or Paladin is chosen to tank the encounter because the fight favors that class's mechanics. I'd say most experienced Guild Main Tanks know they won't be tanking all the time. Unless things have changed drastically in Ulduar, a standard warrior protection spec should probably be able to handle every tanking situation. Even with that in mind, say we had 3 tanks in a raid, with Tank A's tanking spec weighing heavy into single target threat, Tank B's tanking spec leaning towards survivability, and Tank C's tanking spec being your standard Tanking spec, it's common sense to can swap out each Tank's specialty for the appropriate tank for the fight. Unused tanks can therefore still be very useful and contribute decent DPS in a DPS spec.

Two protection specs would be considered by the guilds MT. Usually the MT is only in a raid to tank, not to dps on a boss. Thus having the second protection spec would fine tune them for different encounters.

I agree with the OT's having the freedom to spec w/e second spec, but as a MT I feel 2 prot specs would be the way to go.

[Beatzz]

Source: treyu main dw?

Deep Wounds, aka 15/5/51

[treyu]

i sooo knew what DW ment >.> :P

[Hypatia]

I'll speak up here and say that I'm one of Arianne's co-tanks. ;> My plan is to go for a DPS spec and a tank spec. I'm going to be experimenting, however, with various specs like the UA spec and a heavier protection spec--and I'm going to be ready to respec into one of those in either of my specs depending on the fight. If we absolutely need a warrior with huge threat or a warrior with max mitigation for a hard mode fight, I'll bring it. Otherwise, I expect that some fights we'll run with me as DPS.

I expect the other tanks will do likewise. Of course, we'll do whatever needs to be done to win a fight. And more often than not, that will mean either being a tank or being DPS. Only rarely will it mean being a specialized tank.

Depends as well on how exactly progression goes this time around. If we're getting into a lot of hard modes that have specialized tank requirements, things are going to be expensive. We might even end up with the different tanks taking different specialized specs for their tank specs for those specialized fights, so that we have to do less respeccing on the fly.

[Joacimcans]

I think some people are going crazy over the dual spec thing. Just because you have 2 specs you can switch to on the fly doesn't mean you can't have a 3rd spec you can respec to. I personally am going to main spec 15/5/51 then go a pvp arms spec for my off spec. and if i need to for some unknown reason spec a UA spec for a raid encounter i can easily pay my 50G (omg gold is hard to farm) and respec to it.

[FeeliksReturns]

Stop derailing this thread.

No one cares if you don't think 2 tank specs is viable blah blah blah. That is an entirely different debate, which does not belong here. There are certain tanks in certain guilds in certain situations where 2 prot specs is optimal. Maybe they passed all offspec dps gear to prot pallies for ret and to DK's for blood or w/e.

Bottom line, this topic is relevant to those who understand it suits their context, and if it's not then please gtfo.

Bloody thread derailers.

Back to topic. I tried this spec months back on Patch but was underwhelmed with the results. I was also in my threat set at the time (min def rating, max hit, hard expertise cap, with some added crit). But Cider has made an excellent point about how well this synergizes with an avoidance/unhittable set, boosting your survivability as well.

Cudmaster I think you have a very good point about gag order-- I don't see the value of it considering you wont be using it on bosses, and as a best practice on trash I generally prefer to use shield bash as an interrupt rather than silence for the longer spell lockout (not in pvp though).

I can't however decide on glyphs, and I think ultimately this will decide which points one deposits those last few points in.

Something I keep asking myself is: is this build for pure threat? or damage first and any subsequent threat boost that follows?

I think deciding that is key to choosing between say Glyph of HS (5% crit in 3.1 and no longer gives rage), and Glyph of Vig.

Is survivability a concern? Personally if using it on certain ulduar threat-sensitive bosses I think it will still be good to have access to say Last Stand. Then taking that, does it become necessary to glyph for it?

Talent Calculator - World of Warcraft

After much deliberation, I came to terms with losing imp TC.

Likely to go with
Glyph of Revenge
Glyph of Heroic Strike
Glyph of Vigilance


The survivability spec:
Talent Calculator - World of Warcraft (swapped incite for focused rage, imp revenge for imp disciplines)
Glyph of Last Stand
Glyph of Shield Wall
Glyph of Blocking

[Ciderhelm]

Gag Order is a relic of when I was using Shield Slam in my rotation. One point in it may be technically better than the alternatives though since even w/ Last Stand you need to get deeper, and you will still use Shield Slam occasionally.

[cudmaster]

Source: Ciderhelm Gag Order is a relic of when I was using Shield Slam in my rotation. One point in it may be technically better than the alternatives though since even w/ Last Stand you need to get deeper, and you will still use Shield Slam occasionally.

I didn't bother to check things out on the PTR (I like surprises!) so I have no idea if the bosses in question can be disarmed or not, if they can, I think points in IMP disarm would be the better choice but if not then virtually any other talent would be better and buffing block value/shield slam does at least gives you some bump to mitigation and threat abilities.

Don't supposed anyone actually tried disarming??? I tend to overlook it myself most of the time (imagine how excited I was when i figured out I could disarm the horsemen and easily survive a whole cycle with one of them sans healer).