What is the General Consensus?

[Chrono_Rising]

Snip

Since you seem to feel people don't remember the progression of the conversation lets actually go through it:

Data:
War>Pld>Drk

Forum 'concensus':
War>>Pld>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Drk

War does most DPS. Pld a smidge behind war. Drk a smidge behind pld. Each by a couple % in damage.

Pld/War mitigation kits are solid and jockey for 1st based on how much a war is in tank stance. Drk is behind by X amount in mitigation (depending on how its measured. Its an inexact science) but still has enough mitigation to be effective in all content.

Group support: Pld by miles>War (shake it off)> Drk TBN. While nice, are not nearly as important as the volume on official forums suggests.

Drk is behind by a bit in every category that matters, but only by relatively small amounts. It's entirely usable. Just not optimal. But anything that is even a fraction of a % suboptimal is always slammed as 'useless', 'unplayable', 'broken' and 100 other hyperbolic terms.

There is truth to much of the forum complaints. But the extreme loudness exaggerates them on every count.

This is the post in question.

Data:
War>Pld>Drk

Up to here we are good. This matches what 99% of the posts have said in this thread in nearly exactly the same degree of magnitude.

Forum 'concensus':
War>>Pld>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Drk

Ok, well using this thread as its own survey of forum consensus, this hyperbole. Why? Because the vast majority of the posts before this were completely well measured in their analysis. You then threw in this inflammatory judgment on the nature of people's complaints, while at the same time engaging in the same behavior you are accusing the vocal minority for.

War does most DPS. Pld a smidge behind war. Drk a smidge behind pld. Each by a couple % in damage.

Pld/War mitigation kits are solid and jockey for 1st based on how much a war is in tank stance. Drk is behind by X amount in mitigation (depending on how its measured. Its an inexact science) but still has enough mitigation to be effective in all content.

Again, you are in agreement here, I would say warrior is more than a "slightly" above paladin, and by extension dark knight, but "smidge" isn't an exact term by nature. Max data suggests around 9% different between warrior and dark knight. But again fairly reasonable.

Group support: Pld by miles>War (shake it off)> Drk TBN. While nice, are not nearly as important as the volume on official forums suggests.

This is where I come in with my post. A good portion of meta strats rely on the defensive utilities in question, the fact that dark knight is lackign here is part of the issue with the class. I listed a number of them in later posts. Part of what makes those strats optimal is the very thing you are saying is not important. Without the defensive utilities people's uptime would drop and speed clears would suffer, that actually is significant. Dark contributes nearly nothing, if not nothing to this process. There is a reason meta strats utilize defensive utility, because it is significant for increasing uptime to shave off those precious few seconds. When comparing apples to apples (and not cover to trick attack) Warrior and paladin are bringing more dps to the table, and are increasing other's dps with their utilities, Dark Knight is not, and it is noticeable.

Drk is behind by a bit in every category that matters, but only by relatively small amounts. It's entirely usable. Just not optimal. But anything that is even a fraction of a % suboptimal is always slammed as 'useless', 'unplayable', 'broken' and 100 other hyperbolic terms.

There is truth to much of the forum complaints. But the extreme loudness exaggerates them on every count.

You start by recognizing the argument pushed by dark knights, Dark Knight is behind in three relevant metrics which pushes dark knight into a more distant third, and then pass judgement on the claim with the "fractions of a %" "useless" "unplayable" I will double check but I don't see this in the majority of the posts in this thread using this language. You are the person who is pushing the hyperbole, and then blaming dark knights for it, when you are literally reading these words into peoples feedback. You are getting annoyed at the playbase for vocalizing their complaints to the dev team in the only way that it can be done. By the way since your posts have become so keen on the "answering the OP's question" bit, this analysis of your opinion of the forums feelings on the matter are completely outside of the OPs original question.

9% behind warrior dps is not fractions of a percent behind.
1 extremely questionable utility is not fractions of a % behind paladins 4 utilities, or warriors 1 strong utility.
The defensive utilities are widely used by groups, and form a core part of speed running strategy, it is an important factor.

The reason for your judgement is based on shaky ground at best, and you are engaging in hyperbole in the opposite direction. Oh and as for this:

If they had come in at 4.0, it would have been "Forums will make you think War is much worse than it is because they are obscenely loud about their grievances". Replace 4.0 and War with X.0 and Y Class at any point in any game and any class/faction/thing. It will hold true. If characterizing the vocal minority as making more noise and exaggerating their grievances is to 'broad' a stroke then so be it. Ill stand by that 7 days a week.

Its funny looking at your main warrior class's post history, as well as the alt that you are currently on, I don't see the same level of arguing with 4.0 warrior buffs in warrior threads. Only Dark Knights, maybe we could acknowledge the bias here and let people have their discussions free of accusations and judgement. Where is the outrage when its our class trying to get buffs and changes? Apparently those weren't days of the week.