But hey, if the cook thinks he's putting out some bad food, I guess it's ok as long as they are planning on fixing it sometime down the road. Who cares if it tastes bad now.
We have three options to approach issues like this, really. We can lie and tell you we don't think it's a problem. We can say nothing. Or we can tell you that we think it's a problem and eventually want to fix it. This is the road I try to take as much as I can. The fourth option, fix it immediately, isn't on the table as much as you might really, really want it to be, or we would have already done so. I highly doubt we will see GC post on this thread again, he tends to not come back to threads where he has spouted ignorance and in turn been roflstomped for it.
I think you are mistaking "I disagree" for "LOL I PWNED GC!" :)
If Warriors are balanced around Rend, why is it not in the Protection tree? Or at least at a lower tier in the arms tree? That's kinda like saying Paladins are balanced around Imp Lays of Hands -and- Heart of the Crusader at the same time.
As someone above pointed out, Deflection is not in the Protection tree either. We're not really trying to encourage the 0/0/71 talent spec.
At the same time, going for dps talents as a tank can be an interesting choice. If it's a fight with a lot of quickly spawning adds, having more damage can be useful in picking them up. If it's a dungeon without a big risk of you dying, then going for dps can speed things along. Yet when you run into a situation where keeping you alive may be hard, then you can consider dumping those talents in lieu of something to keep you alive. I understand that given a choice between threat and mitigation that most tanks will choose the latter every time. Still, some of the most fun gear decisions I have had tanking were deciding when I could afford to sacrifice survival for threat and vice versa. A couple of designers looked at the cooldown, evaluated how often it really mattered, concluded not often, and thought the ability would be simpler to understand, less frustrating, and perhaps a small DK buff without the cooldown.
There's no metric. There's no philosophy. There's just a subjective decision being made. They give DKs a massive survivability buff because they think it makes tooltips read cleaner.
I can't believe I'm letting myself get sucked into this, but these two statements [above] are at odds with each other.
Before I had my yacht, gin and pony, this is what we would call science. Make a hypothesis ("looked"), tested the hypothesis ("evaluated") and decided whether the hypothesis could be rejected or not ("concluded").
The community (or rather a subset of) looks at the cooldown being removed from Will of the Necropolis, perhaps notices for the first time what the talent really does, perhaps disagrees with that course of action and leaps to the conclusion that the inmates must be running the asylum. Short of publishing a peer-reviewed paper that demonstrates our decision was made for sound reasons, we're not going to be able to walk those nay-sayers through all of our logic, nor would they be likely to be swayed by actual evidence anyway, nor do we want to get into a position where we have to ask the community's permission to make a change we think is right for our game. :)
None of that is to argue that some of these decisions aren't very subjective. They are. You can't turn a system as complex as WoW into some kind of mega equation that accurately predicts every outcome in the game. And really, who would want to? It's a game with a lot of math. It's not just math.
Really, though, we're off topic (again). This is why I am often reluctant to post. A thread trying to understand our philosophy on aspects of tanking became another stage for "If I was a WoW designer, I would have avoided all these foolish mistakes!"