|
by Maldazzar, Level 37
Last updated at September 6, 2007, 7:17 am
|
Let's look at the 2s bracket. There are two different basic makeups possible here, two dps and one healer/one dps. The strategy for a single DPS team is usually pretty straightforward. Outlast their healers mana, steadily burn one of them down until they simply run out of options. Warlock/paladin is a perfect example of this, where the strategy used is simply DoTing, mana draining, and healing. Eventually, the opposing team runs out of mana, and loses. While the (slightly) imbalanced state of SL warlocks makes this a pretty simple fight, the principle holds true for Warrior/Paladin, Priest/Rogue, etc. Obviously, it is possible to coordinate CCs to end the fight early, but this is just an extension of running the other team out of options.
On the other end of this pretty short spectrum, you have double dps. Warlock/Shadow Priest is popular due to their high synergy, as well as SL Lock/Frost Mage due to their amazing CC and high survivability. The plan is, simply put, to generate enough damage to bring someone down before they can kill one of you. This is usually done by controlling the healer for as long a period of time as it takes to slaughter the single DPS, at which point the healer is completely helpless.
There are, rarely, combinations of the 2. Warrior/Resto Shaman potentially has the burst to kill someone well before the healer runs out of mana, thanks to lucky Windfury procs (nerfed to severely reduce burst), Bloodlust, and Skillherald. Resto druid/rogue has the potential to CC a target (between sap/cyclone/feral charge/blind/etc) also well before the game goes into any sort of endurance phase. These makeups have too many counters to make them overpowered, but they are (somewhat) a separate category.
But back to talk of weaknesses. Every makeup has a flaw that can be abused to gain the upper hand. Mage teams are liable to run out of mana, warrior teams are more vulnerable to being controlled, rogue teams just get raped by warrior teams (unless they're double DPS), hunter teams get ****** by LoS. Druids, with their instant heals, immunity to polymorph, snares, and a cute little CC of their own, dominate the bracket because of an absence of weakness. SL warlocks, with self-healing, high armor, 20% less damage taken, and all instant damage that can be cast while running around in circles-- combined with fear, and a pet that can dispel and spell lock-- also dominate the bracket because of their very broad range of talents fit into just one class. Therefore, there is an extremely large amount of druid/dps and warlock/healer combinations in top 2v2 teams worldwide. It would be foolish not to take this into account when forming an arena team, and not having an effective counter to warlocks and druids would make any attempts to climb to the top levels very short-lived.
Skipping 3v3. You can apply the same principles easily enough- with possibilities of either 2 healers/1 dps, 1 healer/2 dps, or 3 dps, each with their own unique advantages and disadvantages.
Let's go straight to 5v5. Imagine a blank ladder. You have no idea what the opposition is going to be running, you have no idea what challenges might lie in your immediate future. Your goal is, quite simply, to make the all-purpose, all-powerful team. What classes do you include? Which talents are indispensable? Let's start with healing. You'll want to run 2 healers. Can't have one of them getting locked down and having someone die prematurely, that would be just stupid. Which 2 healers? Well, paladin is a good choice. They have very good sustainability, defensive dispels, a blessing of protection if things go downhill, a blessing of freedom to help with kiting. If something goes wrong, it's nothing a quick divine shield and repeated spamming of heals won't solve! You'll want to get a priest in there somewhere, a second dispeller to dispel your paladin when he gets CCed is very useful-- and mass dispel creates targets that would previously be impossible to kill. Mana burn is nothing to laugh at either, allowing you to cripple their survivability given the right circumstances. Now, should this priest be holy or shadow? Holy brings a combination of instant heals and decent survivability with blessed resilience, whereas shadow is much more vulnerable to getting locked down and focused to death-- while dealing damage that is largely dispellable. Holy it is. Now, you have room for 3 dps. Let's see, you'll want that mortal strike debuff, so warrior is a given. A decurse is extremely useful (make that EVERY debuff you can remove), so you'll want to get in a mage or a moonkin druid. Did I say moonkin? Mage it is, then. Incredible CC, and incredible burst; can't go wrong there! And the 5th DPS. You could get a rogue, a warlock, a hunter... all pretty viable classes versus the right makeups, but why struggle to fit them in! Just get an elemental shaman. Backup heals, an extra offensive dispel, bloodlust, totems to cleanse poisons, to break fear, to eat spells, to make your warrior do more damage... an insane amount of burst. Perfect!
And so, you have 2345. A balanced, effective combination which is set to dominate the 5v5 bracket! They are, if you will, the warlock/druid of large scale arenas. Skill is important, but so is makeup, and you can't go wrong with a group that supports itself as much this one does. In fact, it has done very well, as demonstrated by arena standings. It is practically unbeatable!
Fast forward a month. You're trying to make an arena team. All you see is 2345, 2345, 2345. What can you do? You can make a mirror team, and try to outplay them at their own game. Or, you can tailor a team that exploits their weakness, a team that- if played correctly, can ensure that few 2345 teams will torment you ever again. In order to do that, however, you must first locate a flaw. What is the weak spot on a team that has a seemingly limitless source of damage, CC, and independent healing?
The warrior. It is counter-intuitive to focus a warrior who has competent healing behind him, as he has 2-3 healers sitting there ready to back him up, and feeding rage to a class reliant on rage is not terribly effective. But at closer look, he also takes 10% more damage simply by sitting in his damage dealing stance, and loses most of his utility if he is forced into a defensive role. But how can you, with 3 dps, put that kind of pressure on a warrior? Answer: you can't.
And so, 4 dps is born. I'm not going to argue that it requires more skill than 2345 (although I honestly don't see the argument for the reverse). 4 dps is a simple response to the warrior-centric makeups that have been dominating arenas for the past few months. They have their counters (imagine a 2 healer setup with a ROGUE lead!)
http://eu.wowarmory.com/team-info.xml?r=Al'Akir&ts=5&t=Victorinox&select=Victorinox&fl=1
Yet nobody seems to run such a makeup.. because 4 dps teams just aren't common enough to make countering them worthwhile. It has nothing to do with skill-- if anything, it has to do with 2345's amazing utility in the face of almost any opposition (often confused with 'no skill required'). Anyone on such a team at a top standing claiming to be good is quite justified. Anyone on such a team in a top standing complaining about a team built to counter them.. is retarded.
That's about it. Going to sleep, I'll fix any mistakes tomorrow morning.

13 comments
shinosai Sep 6, 2007 at 8:42 am
+1 votes
Nice article. I agree with you completely. 2345 - Paper is fine, nerf rock (scissors)
shinosai Sep 6, 2007 at 11:46 am
+1 votes
I suppose I misread him when he said "Anyone on such a team in a top standing complaining that they are
unable to beat a team designed to counter their once uncounterable
makeup.. is retarded."
unable to beat a team designed to counter their once uncounterable
makeup.. is retarded."
Jubeik Sep 6, 2007 at 1:07 pm
+1 votes
Well written indeed. Nice steam of logic to how we've gotten to where we are today in 5v5 arena.
Elitist Sep 7, 2007 at 12:21 am
+1 votes
Good article, neatly debunks most of the complaints that people throw around on gameriot.
Nighteyes Sep 7, 2007 at 12:59 am
+1 votes
Good blog, agree with almost everything said. Albeit I haven't played high-rated 5v5 since season 1, but I can still follow the logic you used quite easily.
Nighteyes Sep 7, 2007 at 1:19 am
+1 votes
Also, the great irony of the situation is the myriad of complaints we
saw mid-season 1 about how mortal strike is overpowered and warriors
are required for every 5v5 team. Season 2 is here and we finally see
some line-ups which can be competitive without a warrior (4 dps and 2
healer 1 rogue counter-combo) and people are still complaining.
Just goes to show humans will always find a way to complain about
anything. I can't wait until the proverbial "4 dps" of Fury is
discovered and the QQ starts all over again.
saw mid-season 1 about how mortal strike is overpowered and warriors
are required for every 5v5 team. Season 2 is here and we finally see
some line-ups which can be competitive without a warrior (4 dps and 2
healer 1 rogue counter-combo) and people are still complaining.
Just goes to show humans will always find a way to complain about
anything. I can't wait until the proverbial "4 dps" of Fury is
discovered and the QQ starts all over again.
nzgs Jan 14, 2008 at 10:35 am
+1 votes
if 4 dps and rogue-centric teams could actually compete for top spot on a consistent basis then maybe you would have a point. 4dps only counters bad 2345 teams.
« Previous |
1 |
Next » |
THE SPOTLIGHT
Arrested over tip, Hassan terrorist, Chuck, Avatar…


Your Comment is being posted. Please wait...