1. If u dont have a pocket heal hpala or disc as arms dosnt matter what u try play 70 or 79.That why 90% war playing prot because easier and more burst.Actually as i see no point to play arms in aly if u dont have a premade group with heals or if u dont wanna use 5 stack faps/bg :D
    Anyway there isnt big different between 70 and 79 war.Lvl 70 wars dont have selfheal and missing more that all so no different between lvl 70 100% arpen war and 79 str gemed war.70s dont hit harder but die faster. If u want play lvl 70 then a healer better choose.
    Edited: March 24, 2021

  2. So Jotunheim then? Okay, so I didn't see any evidence from this warrior that 70 arms is superior to 79. Quite the opposite in fact. I see now why you were anxious to hide your identity, it's because you were extremely ineffective and didn't want it exposed. It kind of undermines the point you were making.

    And I don't feel bad about saying this because you've been pretty nasty and insulting to me.

    So two points:

    1) Look, all I asked for was evidence of your claim that 70 arms warrior is better than 79. Because imo you're giving extremely bad advice to this new guy. I think you're wrong. Most people I know think you're wrong. There are several good 79 arms warriors in the bracket. There are no (not even close) equivalent 70 arms warriors.

    The evidence you "provided" wasn't evidence of your claim at all. It wasn't even the same class. I've no idea what you were trying to prove other than to show off.

    Some 70s sometimes outperform 79s. Okay?? So what? Occasionally this might happen. With specific classes in specific battlegrounds depending on all kinds of factors including team composition and what roles people are performing etc.

    Does this mean that 70 is optimal? No. There are some advantages to being 70 due to secondary stats for sure. I don't deny this. But do they regularly outcompete 79s in battlegrounds? Certainly not. And I base this not on a small sample size but on a large number of battlegrounds that I've experienced.

    Do I need to be the best player in the bracket to have made this observation? No. And neither of us are the best player in the bracket, so we're even there.

    2) You're spreading disinformation that the 79 bracket is unplayable for alliance because they always lose, which turns people away from the bracket and is also false.

    You base this on an extremely small sample size (and I know this not only from your battleground statistics but your lack of knowledge of well-known people in the bracket).

    I have provided evidence that your claims are false. You ignore this. Heliox posts his battleground stats that show 90%+ win percentage. So clearly not all alliance teams are losing, no?

    You don't want to be graveyard farmed. Do you imagine it is only alliance getting graveyard farmed?

    My point here is you have no wider perspective. You've had your narrow experiences and you're making these grand generalisations based on them, despite the fact that people who know the bracket better are contradicting you.

    Those are my two points. Hope that settles it. I don't want this to go on forever either.
    I'm not going to quote sentence by sentence, I'll just give you an overall answer.

    First and foremost, pointing out that you are less than mediocre, is not an insult, unless as I have previously said you take this game so personal that you are unable to take criticism and you perceive a comment on your non-existant skill as an insult, which you do, because this game means everything to you.

    I have been very clear on the reason of why I didn't want my characters doxxed on the forums and why I would rather remain anonymous. I'm over confident in my skills, especially against backpedal warlocks that eat more interrupts and spell reflects than breathe, that can only use voidwalker because using the succubus or felhunter requires an effort.

    On your two points:

    1) You're absolutely delusional beyond belief if you think that I exclusively twink, in fact you're absolutely delusional if you think that I am making **** up.
    Any warrior, regardless of the level knows full well that Arpen>Strength any time of the day, week, month and year. It doesn't matter if you have 2000 attack power. 70% passive arpen will be better, even if that means that you have 1300 attack power or even less. Warrior skills are based off weapon damage and a little plus that you get from each rank, which isn't a big difference between 70 and 79, we're talking about a 100-200 damage gain, which again is overshadowed by armor penetration.

    I'm not basing this off anecdotical evidences, I'm basing this on my experience as a 70 on this bracket in which unless you queue with your usual nasty setup I top the damage charts too often to be considered anecdotical, in fact many 70's have topped the charts despite your claims of this being "anecdotical".

    This was a balanced BG you left yesterday, 1 healer per side:

    Spoiler: Show


    This is a BG where we didn't get stomped to the ground, where we had a chance to do something because we weren't getting shield slammed by 4 prot warriors and aimed shooted by 2 hunters. But yes, obviously henchard, the forever backpedal warlock knows better than anyone how to play a warrior. You don't even have the right talents, and you want to lecture or give advice to others on how to play a class that is unknown to you. Not that you could give advice on warlocks either.
    Why do you have 7% hit rating as a warlock? lol Don't you know the cap for pvp is 4%? 6% if you want to hard cap it against a racial that could avoid a certain school of magic that you use, which as destro (fire) that would be... oh, it doesn't exist.

    You think that some things are coincidential or occasional, because in your walnut brain you can't even fathom the possibility that you are wrong. Why would you be? You had your little reign of terror and you are supported by your henchmen that will jumpt to defend you if things get slippery. Why do you think you need to queue with 4-5 tanks and 2-3 healers in order to win? And you dare to say that I lack self-reflection? Give me a break.

    What sample size are you talking about? The sample size of 5 years of tryharding doesn't reflect the current state of the bracket, nor it matters to anyone but your ego. And you still didn't understand that I have never complained about losing, I was just preparing the lad mentally that if he was to roll on this bracket he would very likely get graveyard farmed for a while, unless he's lucky and gets into a premade. It doesn't take rocket science to understand that graveyard farming and stomping one faction doesn't lead to any motivation or will to improve from such faction, but rather an upcoming frustration that will manifest into quitting. Thus the bracket will get resented from it. Your graveyard farming tendencies do way more harm to the health of the bracket than anyone warning potential new players of what awaits them. But of course, you won't understand this either.

    And yeah, you're right on this one, you're certainly not the best player, perhaps you're the worse of the bunch thus why you're in no position to talk about this, even less about warriors when you're just proving how clueless you are about it.

    2) I'm not spreading any misinformation, I'm telling him the uncomfortable truth, so did Heliox as well. "Join our premades and win". This doesn't seem to contradict my argument that unless you are lucky to get into a premade, you'll get stomped and spam emoted by a bunch of backpedal heroes that have no remorse or hesitation to resort to free action potions when their victory is already undisputed, just to further the humilliation. I'm pretty sure those sort of actions are exactly what a bracket needs in order to stay fresh.

    Oh right, the twinking true kvlt: "YOU MUST KNOW AND RESPECT US IN ORDER TO GAIN OUR ACCEPTANCE." Guess what Henchard, middle finger for you and your buddies.

    Already answered why Heliox has his win ratio.

    I absolutely always, without exception prevent graveyard farming by capping the flags, and I would HoP and cap the flag if there was a clown graveyard farming you instead of capping to end it quickly. I'd rather get 10 fast win BG's, than 1 slow stomp and 20 minutes queue until there are no more BG's. You know why? Because I play to have fun, not to larp as a bully or cope with my insecurities. I don't get joy from stomping a bunch of individuals regardless of the faction or your forum dramas.

    I have quite a wider experience in this game than you do, I can assure you that. If we speak of twinking I have twinked here since 2013 on this accound and since 2011 on another account. And coincidentially I was horde too, until I got sick and tired of your kult mentality and your disproportioned and unjustified ego topped with the endless bullying that you gave to anyone that wasn't part of your kvlt or that you simply didn't like or decided to pick on for whatever stupid reason.

    Stop pretending already, you made a 58 pages thread that got deleted by mods complaining about the "BG IMBALANCE IN 79 BRACKET". Which it ended by you realizing that the only way you had to compete with us, was to play your nasty setup.

    I don't have any interest in this argument anymore either, surprising, right? Thanks for proving again that you are unable to play this game as what it is, a game. And that all you have done in your biblical essays, was project your own doings and worshipping your accorn brain.

    And for the record: The ad-hominem isn't the only logical fallacy that exists. I know it's fashion now by pseudo-intellectuals to attribute every logical fallacy as an ad-hominem, but it wasn't always the case. On your side:
    >"loaded questions" (Constantly asking questions in an attempt to make me appear guilty)
    >"special pleadings"(Anecdotes)
    >"bandwagon" (Heliox does it too) ([...]Anyone in the bracket[...])
    >"appeal to authority" (Twink kvlt)
    >"No true scottsman" (Anyone in this bracket knows that 79 is better)
    >"False cause" (Your ineffective, thus this is the cause of you thinking you're graveyard farmed)
    >"Begging the question" (Making a circular argument all the time in which your conclusion was already included in the premise)

    In short, if you're going to do both debate and police the debate atleast do it properly. I did comit ad-hominem when I called your skills as a warlock trash, that's true. But I didn't comit any when I explained to you why arpen is more beneficial to an arms than strength or a few extra levels. Quite cheeky from your side when you have managed to turn this into your resort of poor justifications. All of it, because you thought that giving your opinion based off your 4 prot warrior friends was valid in the case of arms or fury. You really couldn't stop yourself from being a prick. And you couldn't resist to comb through all the possible characters that could be me, this last one is quite disturbing, though not really surprising with all the aforementioned.

  3. Any warrior, regardless of the level knows full well that Arpen>Strength any time of the day, week, month and year. It doesn't matter if you have 2000 attack power. 70% passive arpen will be better, even if that means that you have 1300 attack power or even less. Warrior skills are based off weapon damage and a little plus that you get from each rank, which isn't a big difference between 70 and 79, we're talking about a 100-200 damage gain, which again is overshadowed by armor penetration.
    You might want to decide already what is your point. Is it to show that 70 twink player can outperform 79s twink players if played right, or to prove that 70 lvl is superior to 79 for some classes?

    About the anecdotal claims. Even if you say these are not anecdotal claims, they won't suddenly change their nature. Do you have any evidence to back up your words? Have you actually tested 70 in comparsion to 79 warrior? Or do you base it on the "every warrior knows that"? (And before you ask, I did not. But I'm not the one claiming with 120% certainty that 70 lvl is the optimal lvl for arms warrior and everyone who thinks otherwise is a walnut brain. The burden of proving that is on you in this situation.)

    While we are at it, you know what "every warrior knows" too? That hit rating > arpen. I'm not sure how much hit rating does 70 need to be capped against 79, but I'm quite sure that's a little more than 5%. Did you include that in your calculations of making the best arms warrior on 70-79 bracket?

    And about the 70s topping charts. It is an anecdotical evidence. You provided us no actual proof of that and you base it on "your experience". Well, "my experience" says the otherwise. Whose experience is worth more in this situation?
    If you and other 70s doing this much damage is a frequent sight, I suppose you can provide us with some screen shots of that in the near future?

    Edit:
    "your walnut brain you can't even fathom the possibility that you are wrong." Can you though?

    Edit 2:
    "unless he's lucky and gets into a premade." Why do people describe getting into premade like that? What do you need luck for? Premades are not some mysterious creation that happen 2 times a year. They are formed almost every day and they are rarely 10-man, so spots are there, waiting. If you choose to be a guildless lone-wolf who doesn't speak to anyone, that's up to you. But "luck" has nothing to do with it.
    Edited: March 24, 2021

  4. So you accuse me of writing "bibbles" (sic) while writing even longer posts, almost all of which is off-topic and a diversionary tactic to avoid the argument.

    I tried to keep my previous post pretty simple. I basically had 2 points: 1) you need to provide examples of effective 70 arms warriors (you still haven't) 2) that your whining about faction imbalance is both false and based on your narrow experience.

    You haven't rebutted either point, you've just hurled many random accusations and attacks at me.

    Let me respond to some of those first:

    - I don't backpedal. I have my "s" key bound to shadowflame. You are just making sh*t up. And how is this relevant anyway?

    - I ate interrupts/spell reflects? Did it matter? In those games where we're farming you I'm more or less checked out and chatting away in gchat/bg chat and/or doing other things. Not like you were posing a particular challenge that needed my full attention (you barely left a scratch). And how is this relevant anyway?

    - I don't have 7% hit rating. I still miss sometimes. And again how is this relevant anyway?

    - My talents. My talents are for me. There are no "correct" talents. These are talents that I prefer and I'm not recommending them to anyone. And how is this relevant anyway?

    - My minions. I prefer voidwalker because of the teams that I face. If the teams I faced were stacked with mages/shamans I would consider felhunter. But they just never are. Succubus? That ***** is dead in 2 ticks of starfall and is useless in battlegrounds (it's not a duel). But how is this relevant anyway?

    - I already said I don't premade, so how am I in control of this "nasty set up" (more QQ from you) And how is this relevant anyway?

    Now I'll move on to responding to some points that are (at least somewhat) on topic:

    -You keep repeating this theorycrafting about arpen. I have already responded to this: I want examples of effective 70 arms warriors that are outperforming 79s. If your theorycrafting is correct, this should be easy. So do it and stop repeating the same stuff (but with added insults about walnut brains)

    - Your screenshot is not a "balanced" battleground. I count 8 twinks for ally and 4 for horde (plus1 decent leveller, niceaxe). If you consider that balanced, then that says a lot about the games you're looking for.

    - I have a "reign of terror" with "henchmen"? Care to explain what you mean in less histrionic language? Again, I don't premade like I already said, so wtf are you talking about? You got stomped hard a few times by teams with me in it (where you tunnelled me instead of the healers) and now bear a grudge like I'm somehow responsible for your bad experience. Get over it.

    - It doesn't matter if you spent 5 years on this bracket if your Paladin has less than 10k kills and your Warrior less than 2k kills. This means you're extremely inactive and unaware of what battlegrounds are like in this bracket on a day-to-day basis. Therefore you shouldn't be commenting on it and telling new people to stay away and it's not worth playing. You don't have the experience to be able to draw this conclusion.

    - My point in the 58 pages thread about "faction imbalance" was to make the same point I'm making to you. The claim that alliance had fewer twinks was (and remains) false. Back then we had a website that tracked the number of twinks, and to many people's surprise and chagrin it demonstrated objectively that, contrary to many alliance players' perceptions, alliance actually had more twinks (I can't recall the exact ratio). I wasn't qqing about imbalance. I was dispelling misconceptions. Which is the same thing I'm doing with you. I played on another server that actually did have big imbalance problems, and trust me warmane has never reached anything close to that (though of course there are swings back and forth, as is natural).

    So again, my two points remain. You haven't demonstrated (with even one example) that 70 warriors are performing more effectively in the bracket than 79s (because they aren't). Faction imbalance (while of course never perfect) is not a *real* problem. Both sides have twinks. Both sides win games. There are gonna be stomps by both sides against each other sometimes, complete with gy camping of course (both sides do it). There are also many even, fun games in between. I am level headed enough not to draw large conclusions, talking about a broken bracket based on a spell of a few bad games.

    But you don't seem capable of responding to any person or situation in anything other than a histrionic, over-the-top way.

  5. So you accuse me of writing "bibbles" (sic) while writing even longer posts, almost all of which is off-topic and a diversionary tactic to avoid the argument.

    I tried to keep my previous post pretty simple. I basically had 2 points: 1) you need to provide examples of effective 70 arms warriors (you still haven't) 2) that your whining about faction imbalance is both false and based on your narrow experience.

    You haven't rebutted either point, you've just hurled many random accusations and attacks at me.

    Let me respond to some of those first:

    - I don't backpedal. I have my "s" key bound to shadowflame. You are just making sh*t up. And how is this relevant anyway?

    - I ate interrupts/spell reflects? Did it matter? In those games where we're farming you I'm more or less checked out and chatting away in gchat/bg chat and/or doing other things. Not like you were posing a particular challenge that needed my full attention (you barely left a scratch). And how is this relevant anyway?

    - I don't have 7% hit rating. I still miss sometimes. And again how is this relevant anyway?

    - My talents. My talents are for me. There are no "correct" talents. These are talents that I prefer and I'm not recommending them to anyone. And how is this relevant anyway?

    - My minions. I prefer voidwalker because of the teams that I face. If the teams I faced were stacked with mages/shamans I would consider felhunter. But they just never are. Succubus? That ***** is dead in 2 ticks of starfall and is useless in battlegrounds (it's not a duel). But how is this relevant anyway?

    - I already said I don't premade, so how am I in control of this "nasty set up" (more QQ from you) And how is this relevant anyway?

    Now I'll move on to responding to some points that are (at least somewhat) on topic:

    -You keep repeating this theorycrafting about arpen. I have already responded to this: I want examples of effective 70 arms warriors that are outperforming 79s. If your theorycrafting is correct, this should be easy. So do it and stop repeating the same stuff (but with added insults about walnut brains)

    - Your screenshot is not a "balanced" battleground. I count 8 twinks for ally and 4 for horde (plus1 decent leveller, niceaxe). If you consider that balanced, then that says a lot about the games you're looking for.

    - I have a "reign of terror" with "henchmen"? Care to explain what you mean in less histrionic language? Again, I don't premade like I already said, so wtf are you talking about? You got stomped hard a few times by teams with me in it (where you tunnelled me instead of the healers) and now bear a grudge like I'm somehow responsible for your bad experience. Get over it.

    - It doesn't matter if you spent 5 years on this bracket if your Paladin has less than 10k kills and your Warrior less than 2k kills. This means you're extremely inactive and unaware of what battlegrounds are like in this bracket on a day-to-day basis. Therefore you shouldn't be commenting on it and telling new people to stay away and it's not worth playing. You don't have the experience to be able to draw this conclusion.

    - My point in the 58 pages thread about "faction imbalance" was to make the same point I'm making to you. The claim that alliance had fewer twinks was (and remains) false. Back then we had a website that tracked the number of twinks, and to many people's surprise and chagrin it demonstrated objectively that, contrary to many alliance players' perceptions, alliance actually had more twinks (I can't recall the exact ratio). I wasn't qqing about imbalance. I was dispelling misconceptions. Which is the same thing I'm doing with you. I played on another server that actually did have big imbalance problems, and trust me warmane has never reached anything close to that (though of course there are swings back and forth, as is natural).

    So again, my two points remain. You haven't demonstrated (with even one example) that 70 warriors are performing more effectively in the bracket than 79s (because they aren't). Faction imbalance (while of course never perfect) is not a *real* problem. Both sides have twinks. Both sides win games. There are gonna be stomps by both sides against each other sometimes, complete with gy camping of course (both sides do it). There are also many even, fun games in between. I am level headed enough not to draw large conclusions, talking about a broken bracket based on a spell of a few bad games.

    But you don't seem capable of responding to any person or situation in anything other than a histrionic, over-the-top way.

    Of course in your head you are right if you only read and reply to the things that suit your narrative while disregarding the other points that have been made.

    You might want to decide already what is your point. Is it to show that 70 twink player can outperform 79s twink players if played right, or to prove that 70 lvl is superior to 79 for some classes?
    Both cases may occur, otherwise we wouldn't see 70's topping the charts. Another example could be a resto 70 that is almost unkillable and reaches over a million healing, while other restos 79 on the same BG can't.

    About the anecdotal claims. Even if you say these are not anecdotal claims, they won't suddenly change their nature. Do you have any evidence to back up your words? Have you actually tested 70 in comparsion to 79 warrior? Or do you base it on the "every warrior knows that"? (And before you ask, I did not. But I'm not the one claiming with 120% certainty that 70 lvl is the optimal lvl for arms warrior and everyone who thinks otherwise is a walnut brain. The burden of proving that is on you in this situation.)
    Yes I have tested it. It's simple math:

    >Situation A

    Awarr with 3k attack power, 0% arpen tunnels a paladin with 50% damage reduction from armor and 10% from resilience.

    +Warrior hits for 3000.
    +Armor reduces 50% of the physical damage.
    +We are left with 1500.
    +Resilience reduces the 10%
    +The warrior hits for a total of 1350.

    >Situation B

    Awarr with 2.5k attack power and 100% arpen tunnels a paladin with 50% damage reduction from armor and 10% from resilience.

    +Warrior hits for 2500.
    +Armor reduces 0% of the physical damage.
    +We are left with 2499.
    +Resilience reduces the 10%
    +The warrior hits for a total of 2249.

    Who has more damage?

    This really shouldn't come as a surprise. After all if strength was better we would see al the top warriors running with strength gems and 0 arpen, instead the warriors with the highest rating and damage stack the soft arpen and then cap it or try to cap it with executioner. And you would be surprised how low our attack power is compared to in example a paladin. Maybe we have like IDK, 5k attack power unbuffed, while some BiS paladins and UH DK's run with above 6k AP, sometimes even 6.5k unbuffed. Armor penetration and weapon speed are more decisive factors in the damage of a warrior than strength.

    While we are at it, you know what "every warrior knows" too? That hit rating > arpen. I'm not sure how much hit rating does 70 need to be capped against 79, but I'm quite sure that's a little more than 5%. Did you include that in your calculations of making the best arms warrior on 70-79 bracket?
    The hit rating for melee and yellow skills is 5%. The only exceptions being taunt and charge and intercept stun effects, which I have to investigate if this is how it should be or if it's bugged. My suspicioun is that the stun counts as a magical effect for some reason.

    And about the 70s topping charts. It is an anecdotical evidence. You provided us no actual proof of that and you base it on "your experience". Well, "my experience" says the otherwise. Whose experience is worth more in this situation?
    If you and other 70s doing this much damage is a frequent sight, I suppose you can provide us with some screen shots of that in the near future?
    Well yes, of course I will provide screenshots if you want to, or if we're in the same BG you'll see it by yourself too if that happens. But so far we both have seen it happen before, haven't we? We have seen Allgammon, Nyppers (I think I'm spelling it wrong) and other 70's top the damage charts on several occasions. And we also have seen healers top the healing charts like in example Deadi.

    Edit:
    "your walnut brain you can't even fathom the possibility that you are wrong." Can you though?
    Yes, I have no problem to admit that I'm wrong, if I'm wrong. But in this particular case, I personally think, and this is my own opinion, that Henchard could have given me the benefit of the doubt.

    Edit 2:
    "unless he's lucky and gets into a premade." Why do people describe getting into premade like that? What do you need luck for? Premades are not some mysterious creation that happen 2 times a year. They are formed almost every day and they are rarely 10-man, so spots are there, waiting. If you choose to be a guildless lone-wolf who doesn't speak to anyone, that's up to you. But "luck" has nothing to do with it.
    I know, I'm not saying this as if I would refuse to premade or as if I avoid them. I'm saying this for the new players that are unaware of the existence of a twink community and simply queue a few BG's to test the waters. If they queue solo and are lucky to get with a premade group they'll perhaps consider staying in the bracket. But if they queue and get against the usual suspects and end up being graveyard farmed for a couple weeks, perhaps they'll just ditch smurfing altogether.
    Edited: March 24, 2021 Reason: Avoiding double posting.

  6. Another example could be a resto 70 that is almost unkillable and reaches over a million healing, while other restos 79 on the same BG can't.
    We are talking about 70 dps. 70 healers are fine, they are tougher and got less mana problems than 79 at a price of lesser healing output. Both versions are viable.

    But so far we both have seen it happen before, haven't we? We have seen Allgammon, Nyppers (I think I'm spelling it wrong) and other 70's top the damage charts on several occasions.
    Well, that's the thing. We don't. They usually do mediocre damage. I'm yet to see any of them being at least at the top 3 on a bg filled with 79 twinks. And EVEN if they succeed to do that, does that prove that they wouldn't do the same (or more) if they were playing this bg as their 79 counterparts? The answer: no.

    >Situation B

    Awarr with 2.5k attack power and 100% arpen tunnels a paladin with 50% damage reduction from armor and 10% from resilience.

    +Warrior hits for 2500.
    +Armor reduces 0% of the physical damage.
    +We are left with 2499.
    +Resilience reduces the 10%
    +The warrior hits for a total of 2249.
    ...That's not how armor penetration works. From this point i know we should not discuss theorycrafting further. I wish you good luck on bgs.
    Edited: March 24, 2021

  7. Of course in your head you are right if you only read and reply to the things that suit your narrative while disregarding the other points that have been made.
    If I had responded to every one of your false accusations, ad hominem attacks and histrionic delusions, my reply would've been longer than War and Peace. So I tried to keep it as short as possible and only respond to the most eye-catching ones.



    Still waiting for the example of a 70 arms warrior who does more damage than Spoton or Walec (cos it *definitely* ain't you).

  8. We are talking about 70 dps. 70 healers are fine, they are tougher and got less mana problems than 79 at a price of lesser healing output. Both versions are viable.



    Well, that's the thing. We don't. They usually do mediocre damage. I'm yet to see any of them being at least at the top 3 on a bg filled with 79 twinks. And EVEN if they succeed to do that, does that prove that they wouldn't do the same (or more) if they were playing this bg as their 79 counterparts? The answer: no.



    ...That's not how armor penetration works. From this point i know we should not discuss theorycrafting further. I wish you good luck on bgs.
    There isn't much to be discussed regarding this whole thing. The effectivity of arpen has been proven for the past 12 years, thus why every single warrior that has a relevant rating goes for it.

    If I have to choose between a warrior with 0 arpen and 3k attack power, and a warrior with 2.5k attack power and 100% arpen, I will go for the latter.
    You guys can think whatever you want, I'm fine either way. I don't like struggling with rage when I can simply go up to 50+ in 1 charge and swing.

  9. I guess this is no longer my post ^^ Thank you anyway for your reponses !

  10. 4 Weeks Ago  
    Im gearing feral 59lvl twink to gank around honor hold, nothing else. Almost done.

    Next Im planning 60lvl hunter for the same purpose but cant sell anything here on Warmane to get some coins cuz no one is doing 60lvl raids...

  11. 3 Weeks Ago  
    Wrong. There are raids happening at alliance side in the "Pride"guild. I know they are not that often,as they need more activity,but as soon as they get more members raids will get more often too. So for the fellas that wants to do a 60 lvl content,ally side and "Pride" guild is the place.

First 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •