The second option is my take on that statement, but I guess we'll see what happens when it goes live.It's one of two things that will happen.
1) GC may mean that even with the nerf, they weren't happy with the change in damage for Fury being closer and decided to buff Fury at that point. In this retrospect, the 9% to hit is still there and they're simply buffing Fury.
2) GC may mean that when they saw the changes to arms even after the 9% hit change, that it was the wrong way to go so they decided to scratch all the plans and simply buff Fury. That's where a lot of arms warriors are concerned and hoping that it doesn't go it.
Understood. I know it's not a huge nerf, but it is a nerf. I'm prot probably 80-90% of the time, but there was a long period both pre-bc and in TBC that I was fury, and Arms is like a huge breath of fresh air. I'd rather they not change it in order to make another tree more appealing, and would rather they left it as is and made the changes mentioned to Fury.Let me state this much: the 9% hit is not as significant of a nerf as people are worrying about. Yes, if you have a high amount of crit, you'll see a lil less Sudden Death procs, but now, even your hits will have a chance to light it up which in turn gives you a steady percentage of chance to get SD to go off. It's a change but in no means a huge change that will drastically lower the DPS you're currently pulling off with arms.
Remember that Crits can miss. which means you might have 60% chance to crit, but you still can miss that white damage. It doesn't remove the miss chance, it just replaces the hit chance with a crit value. That's the commonly accepted view of how Blizzard's attack table is.
Either way, I'm fairly certain it won't be a huge change to the playstyle.