We have moved to Warcraft Wiki. Click here for information and the new URL.


Discussions about the table itself, as in structure / color / style should be moved to Template talk:Classtableall
Past discussions archived to...

Class vs Role[]

I had to giggle at this table. And the more I think about it, the sillier it appears. It's attached to the "Class vs Race" table as if it had something to do with that table other than the first column. It consists of entirely subjective values; there are at least a few columns with no "4" (best in show) listed, calling it "must talent into this".

In light of the dungeon finder, I think this table should be simplified to: Tank, Heal, DPS. A description at the top of the table saying "particular talent tree specializations make each of these classes more effective at particular roles; see those class descriptions for details." IE, this table attempts to portray entirely too many nuances for this particular article. Ideally, I would limit the role rating to "can/cannot fill this role". Anything more than this risks ePeen measurements. For instance, the above AoE section. But more, simply because *everything* is situational, specialization-dependent. "Variables preclude a fixed answer."

If people insist on having an epeen role rating on the wiki, then perhaps it belongs on the pages for the individual classes, where it can be discussed in more depth.

I'll give this a bit to see if it generates controversy, then I will make the Dungeon Finder-centric change if nobody objects reasonably. ... and if I remember. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:51, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

I Like this change, and since no one seems to have said anything about it, I think I'll go ahead and try. Won't commit nothing unless I manage to create the table though, I'm not the best at wiki editing. Cadinsor (talk) 17:20, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

The whole table of specialty roles as it exists now is ridiculous, somehow the DK has a heal of 1, which is only a self heal, but Warlock has a heal of 0, DK Pull is 0+1 but has one of the best pulling mechanisms out there (Death Grip) plus a high threat ranged AOE (Death and Decay), saying any one tanking class is better than another is also silly, don't Warriors have to talent into their tanking? then should they not be 3+1 like the other tanks? Same with Priests vs other healers. Hunter's are 3+1 on DPS, so they're not the best before talenting but afterward are a 4? uhm OK, the whole MA column is a complete joke. Definitely agreed that the Dungeon Finder roles method is much better than the way it currently is. Eht (talk) 16:08, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
Since it's been quite a while, and nobody has objected, I think I'll go ahead and make the change. I agree completely with this. And, if nothing else, the changes can be reverted if need be, correct? ShadowDragoonFTW 19 October 2010

Class Campaigns[]

Hi. Would anyone know what are the class campaign articles ? For example some parts of the Demon Hunters' is detailed in the Fel Hammer article, but there's nothing about their campaign in the Illidari article. Am I missing something ? Should we detail each class' campaign in the class hall article, or in the organization's article ? For example, should the Mage campaign be described in the Tirisgarde article, or in the Hall of the Guardian one ? I'd go with the former. -- ShellShockLive (talk) 22:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)