[Tristessa]

Source: gyre satrina, I don't think 95% of the current tanks out there could answer your questions more than 75%.

I think that most decent tanks who are serious about being in a raiding guild should know at least half of the first bunch of questions. I knew at least half the answers before coming to Tankspot--and most of the answers were from lurking in the WoW official warrior forums and from wowwiki.com.

(I'm not even in a "raiding" guild...lawl)

I think that:
*. willingness to tank, and
*. a willingness to improve

Are very important as well, and more than makes up for not being able to answer the other half of those questions.

[Razmo]

Well ofc a good tanks knows the answers. But 3 tanks I take under my wing in my guild don't know them, the thing I love about them, they are willing to learn and they don't care how aslong as there raid and skills improve. It's that kind of detecation you need to be lookign for.

[Wulverin]

It's always much easier to teach knowledge and train skills than it is to modify behaviour or attitude.

Assuming the minimum required knowledge and skills are present from that point on I would always recruit based on personality, behaviour and attitude.

[Razmo]

I agree 100%

[Centx]

There is a big difference in 5 man and raid tanks, and as satrina said being good at one does not mean you are good at the other. The question's Satrina asked are question that, while they pertain to the warrior class as a whole, are much more important for raid tanks. For guilds progressing through SSC/TK now it can be difficult to pull in quality recruits, ebcause most servers have a fair amount of guilds running the same content, ewach said guild carrying a mix of good and bad players, this leaves the pool for competent new players fairly small so some form of interveiw process is necessary, This is generaly not going to be the case for guilds in Karazhan, or running T6 content.

[Kenney]

A lot really seems to be how your guild is structured. On one hand, I would really like to hear a lot of those questions answered right the moment they were asked. I like people that are proactive rather than reactive in their research. Anyone that researches how to do their job well will know the answers to those questions, and I think a knowledge of the theory demonstrates a commitment to excellence.

HOWEVER: as many people have pointed out, knowing your theory does not neccessarily mean that you are smooth with your cycle, manage your rage well, and can position well while maintaining high threat. There's more to the job than theory. My feeling is that if you have one theorist in your warrior tank pool, and everyone else in that pool LISTENS to them- that is enough. I spent a year acting as off-tank to an extremely good twitch player who just didn't enjoy reading boards and messing with spreadsheets (or mathematica =x). We made an awesome team though, because he would ask my advice on threat cycles and gear- and WAS the kind of person who could be relied on to think to stance dance to mocking blow when needed, and he had a very good intuitive sense for learning progression content. Between the two of us, it was really good- we respected each other enormously, and each contributed to the team in our own way.

So at the end of the day, I don't think that every potentially good tank knows the theory. Not all good tanks are researchers. Then again, if you have 3 applicants a week, then you can afford to look for researchers with twitch skills. With that many applicants, you can afford to lose a few that might have been perfect for the job, especially if by so doing you avoid the pain of spending hours in tryouts. I'd almost prefer an attitude screen to a research screen, since you so obviously know enough theory for the rest of your tanks, but I can't think how to screen for attitude with the same precision you can screen for knowledge.

[Meatballs]

I would add the following question:

How do you rotate your camera?

Awareness of surroundings is one of the hardest things for a tank, and good awareness is a skill I see very rarely in all players. A tank should be able to rotate his camera with ease, although failing that zooming out to max distance is a big help.

This question doesn't show you they have good awareness, but the ones that come back with a quick answer might possibly be one of those gems that you cant afford to pass up. Looking above its the 'twitch' gamer mentioned above, probably someone that used to strafe jump in quake2

These are the people that learn the encounter first/second time round and are waiting for the other 15-24 people to catch up

[Creampuf]

Frankly, book knowledge doesn't mean diddly when it comes to if someone can play the game. Book knowledge is very useful in a guild to help maximize potential, but it is not something everyone needs. It's far more important that each guild member can listen to constructive criticism, take direction and is smart enough to know what they don't know.

I'd rather play with someone who doesn't know any of the answers, but is willing to work hard to improve as a player than with someone who gets the wrong answer on 25% of the questions but instead of saying "I really don't know" they give a wrong answer that they think is right.

Moreover, a bowl of clam chowder might gain enough sentience to read a board and memorize a few facts about a class to spew back for an interview. That doesn't mean their fingers know what buttons to push when, or how to react when things go to crap.

I'd rather have someone who used a less than ideal threat rotation and who didn't gem out the way the theory wonks claim they should but who never, ever lost their head on a bad pull than raid with someone who could hit max threat every time, but who curled up into a little ball and whimpered for mommy when things went to heck.

Threat rotation and gem selection can be taught. Theorycraft can be learned. But you can't create a cool head and a winning personality out of a panic prone jerk.

Frankly, if given that sort of entrance exam, I'd think "well, tanks may be a dime a dozen, but guilds aren't far behind." And while not getting me probably wouldn't hurt anyone much since I suck only slightly less than a turbo charged Bissell fitted with nitro injectors, there still might be more than a few guys you're turning away that would be a heck of a lot better than the one's your getting.

Good teams are synergistic. Having only theory-craft types who read the discussion boards misses a lot of different personality types who also have something to contribute. Not everyone is into boards and research and class trivia. That doesn't make them less acceptable as players. It makes them different. Good guilds recruitment needs to look at ability and personality as much, or more, than the ability to win the WoW Trivial Pursuit Challenge.

[chuglur]

I would say it really depends on your level of progression and what kind of tank you plan to recruit.

By what kind of tank I mean a project tank that you take on and improve or someone that is your equal and is essentially a 2nd MT.

As for progression level, I would say at this point almost nobody in t4-t6 would know all the answers or 75% of 95% of the answers as previous posters noted. However I would say a majority of 4/6 Sunwell guild MTs would know the answers 95-100%.

Also I agree with the previous post noting that the questions serve as a litmus test of how the applicant answers depending on again what you are recruiting: project/MT. If you are recruiting a project, then his answers don't have to be correct nessasarily. They just have to reflect his desire and willingness to learn as well as his capacity to learn. MTs should pretty much get the answers all right or they will be holding back the guild at some point.

[loquatious]

I dont understand this "book lernin' is useless" we are not talking about real life here, its WoW. When I'm standing there tanking a bosses ankles I'm pretty much relying on my gear and healers to keep me alive. The raid is depending on my aggro to be able to DPS as hard as they can.

My Skill consists of hitting the buttons in the right order at the right time. Every now and again i have to lunge for a healthstone, nightmare seed, cooldown etc. But by and large its not exactly twitch reliant. Having the right gear on, correct gems & enchants + knowing the best strat ahead of time - those are the keys to victory. And suprise, they are the result of research

[Creampuf]

Source: loquatious I dont understand this "book lernin' is useless" we are not talking about real life here, its WoW. When I'm standing there tanking a bosses ankles I'm pretty much relying on my gear and healers to keep me alive. The raid is depending on my aggro to be able to DPS as hard as they can. My Skill consists of hitting the buttons in the right order at the right time. Every now and again i have to lunge for a healthstone, nightmare seed, cooldown etc. But by and large its not exactly twitch reliant. Having the right gear on, correct gems & enchants + knowing the best strat ahead of time - those are the keys to victory. And suprise, they are the result of research

Not knowing the term "effective health," or knowing if a particular gem is the theoretical best choice doesn't imply anything about the person other than they play the game without the benefit of spending additional hours reading forums like this one.

Yes, as a computer game there is a limited set of correct, discreat solutions to the question of "what is the best gem and gear selection given whatever?" But that doesn't mean the person can pick up a target in the raid, or watch the healer's health bars, or manage to do anything but mash buttons.

It's not that book learning is useless. It is rather, a rather small part of being able to play a tank well. Indeed, outside of the max threat rotation, it's all about equipment choices which really aren't about playing at all, but about preparing to play.

It is far more important that a new recruit fit in with a guild in terms of personality, expectations, shared goals, etc. They need to be able to play the role asked of them without drama, and to learn from others who are more experienced than them, or who do have the time to waste reading forums on theorycraft.

A player who knows all those answers off the top of their head is going to leave out a large demographic of players who are still quite capable, good people to have in a guild, and may in fact be better for the guild than the person who does know all those points.

I love it that my guild has folks like me (40 somethings) as well as the younger hard-core gamer crowd. I only started reading these blogs because someone else pointed me here and I found the discussion interesting. But it's hardly the case that I sucked because I didn't have that trivia burned into my brain. I sucked for completely seperate reasons

[minrog]

I think if I had been apping to your guild I would have gotten them right. Most of the people who answer your questions are probably tankspot readers and likely also spend time using Rawr or some other theorycrafting engine to model their setup and gear. By that I mean we're probably not the most accurate sample to look at.

As for being picky I think those are appropriate questions in some respects. Anyone applying to your guild (evil empire?) or someone like Kenco's guild has to realize the tank spots are going to be heavily screened.

By the way, is the Sunder versus Devastate answer:

"Sunder is the crappy non scaling pre-TBC standard rotation skill because Blizzard hates us and wants us to roll Arms for PVP."

"Devastate is the crappy 50% scaling post-TBC standard rotation skill because, well, it's better than nothing and they felt like they had to give us something when they added those extra 10 talent points."

Heh.

[Satrina]

I only have a few things to add at this point to this thread, since our recruiting model has been stable and working for a long time now.

This post was directed at a specific part of the recruiting process, and more than a few people (at least seem to) have made the assumption that questions are the only criteria we use. That's just silly.

I would have thought that screening out raging asshats as part of the overall recruiting process was a given, for example. That said, every guild is different. We care about progression and not much else. As long as a person is skilled, productive during raids, and isn't disruptive of raids while they're going on - I don't care how many people won't group with you in heroics or have you on ignore. Up until the point where your actions start to affect our reputation as a guild, we don't care what you do. Clearly, not every guild is like this.

This thread was started 8 months ago. At this point in the game I do expect a higher level of book learnin' than I did then. That has a lot to do with the maturity and availability of the information (this site, Quigon's nice guide on Elitist Jerks, and other resources around the 'net), but more with our level of progression. I am already expecting applicants to know what order to hit the buttons in if they're looking to get into a Tier 6 guild. What I need to know is if you have the nuances down, many of which are found in theory. What I don't need is to need to take the time to teach someone that, and I especially don't have time to teach things like how to be uncrittable/uncrushable or how to do an optimal threat rotation!

We've been good on tanks for about 5 months now. In my experience in evaluating tanks - and we tried out pretty much everyone who was not an asshat, could answer at least half the questions, and seemed to have a general clue - the ones who had their theorycraft more right than wrong were the ones that ultimately made it to the later weeks of tryout.

Is what I need in a tank the same for everyone else? Probably not. It's working for us, and your mileage will definitely vary.

[Garbid]

Thought I'd mention how I do my questions in my guild. I write them as a reply to the app in the thread. So in fact give them time to do all the research they can/want. Had a mage application where mage was way below in hit rating. I told him that hit rating was his most important stat until he had it capped. Then I asked what his hitcap was and what was he to do about it if he were to join us (stepping into BT).

Leaving it on the thread was imo a good way of seeing if that person either had the knowledge or would spend the time needed to research it. Believe it or not, I even linked mage wow forums into the thread. And still after a coupla days and two more posts, I still hadn't got an answer from him until another spellcaster ruined it for me by answering for him. But his lack of knowledge and lack of researching almost "given" answers were enough.

[Sascaroth]

this is funny as i looked at the questions i answer all of them, on the EH question i answered it's convination of health and armor added up together but i have no idea how to do that i just use the Tankspot calculators :P other then that i answered all the questions right away :P

[Rev13]

I have a dps for a main. (Im here to learn how to tank, and in general im a forum junky) Not only that, I have a dps class with a stream-lined, efficient, cookie cutter, tried and tested method of dealing damage. So much so that there is only one spec and one rotation and 1 method of playing that is considered acceptable. Because of this, apping for a guild is tricky because any Huntard can be taught to spec the spec, and can be told make the macro, and to use it to be the best they can be. It isnt hard. The learning curve is small, because there isnt much to learn. So, getting interviewed doesnt tell the interviewerer as much as other classes, only that I can type on my keyboard and stumble into the WoW forums at least once.

because of that, I see the issue both ways. i look at it this way, OP:

1. you filtered out a candidate who didnt have any active knowledge of his class/role. the candidate had only passive knowledge on the subject.

2. you also didnt get to know the player. maybe he had a bad day at work/school. maybe his brain was exhausted. maybe you made him nervous with the hard questions and he brain-farted the answers. you dont know what he knows, only what he doesnt know, see that?

You can recruit either way, either way isnt right or wrong, in fact, I would recruit classes differently, i think. If its an MT role, or MH, i might be stricter. if its a dps, i might be a little easier, friendlier.

[Satrina]

You clearly haven't read my post a few above yours.

Source: Satrina This post was directed at a specific part of the recruiting process, and more than a few people (at least seem to) have made the assumption that questions are the only criteria we use. That's just silly.

To address your points:

1) Passive is what counts, really. As you say, any monkey can be taught to press the buttons in the right order. (Edit: and for our purposes, we take that ability as given in a recruit, so it's not a selling point) If that's all it were, recruiting would be an exercise in training a dog. Good boy! What I need is someone who has progressed to where I don't need to answer what should I wear for this boss? every night. The foundation of that is theory. What I need is I tried this gear combination based on the boss abilities and observed damage intake from before, and found it better/worse than the one we used before. Healers, what do you think?

2) Exactly the point. If you freeze up with a bunch of questions on a forum where you have as much time as you want to go look it up if you don't know, how can you expect me to believe you will perform in real time when the wheels come off?

I discuss the player in the context of our guild above as well. As I said there, your guild's mileage may vary.

You say you'd be stricter for an MT role. This thread discusses recruiting tanks... Though I don't see why you wouldn't be as stringent for a DPS as anyone else. "Friendly" tends to let in people who die in fire because they can't find their ass with both hands. Again, YMMV.

[Rev13]

I think I need to define myself a bit better.

When I say active knowledge, I am thinking along the lines of person X knowing fact X because he did his research, asked questions (beyond getting in trade and getting some short abbreviated answer) tested, and came up with his conclusions. Knowledge like this is a bit more satisfying to the learner and is more readily brought to mind in a tough situation where the information is needed

When I say passive knowledge, I am again speaking in context of the knowledge's acquisition. Example

[Trade]Warriorguy: How do I be a gud tnak? ne1 help me plx

(exagerration, but you get the point)

[Tankman]You just have 2 Sunder 5 times, then do X and X, and you will be good.
[Warriorguy] KTHXBAI!!

Knowledge like that is what will lead to warriorguy screaming "Why isnt this working!!!1!! I did what the man said!!!" Because theres no theorycraft behind it, no base formula for recalculating on the fly, adjusting as needed, etc.

Sorry for the confusion, we might have been speaking 2 languages to each other