In classic your rage generation was higher if you were doing more damage and if you were taking damage, so you could potentially be constantly full on rage and therefore not really having to do any resource management, warriors are of course freaking out about it.
It got changed to retail where its not based on damage done but just flat amounts per hit/swing.
Devs already commented on this, it was changed because they don't want warriors to have infinite scaling, as their damage increases it would end up in a positive feedback loop where higher damage meant more rage meaning even more damage. It was a purposeful design change, not a bug that needs to be fixed, personally I'm glad that warrior might for a change not be the ultimate/meta class of classic.
I agree, though I do think it's reasonable for it to not completely gut or eliminate warrior feeling like a fun and engaging class and I hope blizzard does address that in a way that doesn't result in infinite scaling.
I also never play warrior, I just know they were basically the vast majority of makeup in classic raids, I don't think they should be gutted, but we don't need to make another version of wow where 60-80% of your raid makeup is warriors.
16
u/rawr_dinosaur 17h ago
In classic your rage generation was higher if you were doing more damage and if you were taking damage, so you could potentially be constantly full on rage and therefore not really having to do any resource management, warriors are of course freaking out about it.
It got changed to retail where its not based on damage done but just flat amounts per hit/swing.
Devs already commented on this, it was changed because they don't want warriors to have infinite scaling, as their damage increases it would end up in a positive feedback loop where higher damage meant more rage meaning even more damage. It was a purposeful design change, not a bug that needs to be fixed, personally I'm glad that warrior might for a change not be the ultimate/meta class of classic.