Any point to a rogue in instances?

[Heavens_Myst]

Just talking about lbrs, ubrs, strath, scholo...

Tried posting on wow boards, but login server down and really don't think i'll get good posts...

Ughh, I just am wondering why i rolled rogue - fairly worthless in any 6+ man group

and in 5man strath/scholo, no chance. any shaman or mage/warlock fills spot a lot more efficiently than I do

since poly > sap, and 4500DPS mage AE > my 900dps short bursts, I guess I'll just have to be happy I can stun =/

We had our first group 5man baron on our server a few hours ago... War/priest/mage/warlock/shaman...

Rogue (and to an extent, hunter) are just fodder...

Opinions from other 60 rogues?

--
Copenhaggen
60 Orc Rogue/Archimonde

[Cybsled]

Locked chests...since Blizzard nerfed the other options ;/

Maybe one day they'll make seaforium actually have a purpose instead of doors that dont exist.

[Larconzor]

For Strath I would rather have 2 ae people for a 5-man run. For the other instances it doesn't much matter to me if its 2 ae classes or an ae class and a rogue. Hell, even 2 rogues wouldn't do bad in most cases.

[Leonardoh_7th]

is an engineer, so he uses bombs and dynomite like candy, and there's been more than a few times where his goblin jumper cables have saved the day.

Granted, he then spends a lot of time getting his hands on stone to stock up again, but it is an option.

[Heavens_Myst]

Yeah, I shouldn't have included scholo, but christ i hate scholo =/

really it's just dead strath side, which has brought me frustration unless doing it with 6-7

[Awanka]

This is why I don't understand all the mages complaining that their dps doesn't scale up with a rogue. It's not like that creates an imbalance, mages are better damage dealing classes anyway because of their AEs and utility.

It's true, if there are any classes in the game that are "gimped," I would say that they're rogues and hunters. Rogues are fine against bosses and single mob targets, but they can't AE, and their CC ability is weak, so they don't bring a lot to the table. Hunters are a bit better because they can off-tank, but still not as useful as warlocks and mages who can CC and AE quite well. I'd say warlocks have the slight upper hand between the two because of their soulstones.

[Awanka]

The class that's truly gimped and worthless is of course warriors on the Alliance side.

[Desx]

how about for the simple fact mages drop like flys, and rogues dps is consistant with no down time?

[Slagar]

I just got done reading your 18 page post on WoW forums. Now I see this shit here.

What is it you would have them do to fix this *slight* to the rogue class? I'm dying of curiousity as to how rogues need to be improved and/or compensated.

[Khalikryst]

The only issue I really see with Rogues is that they aren't well equipped to deal with bosses that have 360 degree point blank AE damage effects (Like Princess Theradras). In those cases you probably would prefer a Hunter or Mage or other ranged class because Rogues will generally just get chewed up unless they're high enough level to resist the effect enough to keep them from being a mana drain on the healer.

But then there's other encounters that are probably similarly "suboptimal" for other classes (although I can't really think of any off the top of my head). *shrug*

[Sanchek]

We took a rogue with us on a BRS run last night and did fine. If he's on tonight, we'll definitely invite him along again.

In general, I think a rogue/hunter's sustainable damage is more useful for running instances than a mage's burst damage with downtime.