Upcoming talent change gutting

[rda]

I'm afraid that is a very niche activity with very tenuous support, at best. Raids are not intended to be soloable, and there are still many encounters that remain impossible to do solo.

Look, if you buy reasoning from Ion on this change, then you should buy his reasoning in his other recent post where he says that WoW is all about minorities and that the answer to "why the f you do things for 1%" is "everyone is 1%".

[Raiju]

Look, if you buy reasoning from Ion on this change, then you should buy his reasoning in his other recent post where he says that WoW is all about minorities.

raiding, pvp, pet battles are significant enough minorities.

previous expansion (/current) soloing - anything challenging in other words is not seen as worth it generally. Same as brawlers guild it seems.

[Felfaadaern Darkterror]

Couldn't all these arguments be made about class selection as well? Clearly some classes are better for certain fights than others, so I should be able to switch classes whenever I like rather than having to re-roll or level a new toon. I mean, come'on Blizz! Shouldn't I be rewarded for knowing how to play more than one class?

[deadman1]

Not really, because this doesn't just effect questing.

No it affects questing, soloing, and normal and hc dungeons, all of which are trivial so it doesn't matter if you change talents.


This doesn't affect raiding because any guild worth it's salt will have stacks of the new reagent, it just makes talent switching in raids more inconvenient.

[rda]

raiding, pvp, pet battles are significant enough minorities.

previous expansion (/current) soloing - anything challenging in other words is not seen as worth it generally. Same as brawlers guild it seems.

That's just saying that how things are is the right way to have them because that's how they are (and if it wouldn't be right to have them that way, then the blues would have them differently). That's circular logic.

[deadman1]

And 30k to a hardcore group is nothing, assuming 2k~each. Honestly 2-5k would be what I'd expect as a low end figure.

So we agree that it will be trivial to raid groups? ok ...

- - - Updated - - -

Couldn't all these arguments be made about class selection as well? Clearly some classes are better for certain fights than others, so I should be able to switch classes whenever I like rather than having to re-roll or level a new toon. I mean, come'on Blizz! Shouldn't I be rewarded for knowing how to play more than one class?

Slippery slope argument. Not exactly helpful for discussion.

[Raiju]

So we agree that it will be trivial to raid groups? ok ...

no, to hardcore raidgroups. You know those ones who won't be using legendaries during their progress, who currently boost dozens of people/groups, etc.

They're a minority of raiders.

Slippery slope fallacy doesn't work unless you point out why their escalation is invalid, btw.
@rda they attempted to create content for people like us who like challenging solo content and apparently that was the nonstarter. They are now focusing their attention elsewhere. Talent changes like these while needing meetings don't take much to implement.

[Jessicka]

Look, if you buy reasoning from Ion on this change, then you should buy his reasoning in his other recent post where he says that WoW is all about minorities and that the answer to "why the f you do things for 1%" is "everyone is 1%".

I don't buy his post on that. Class design; even this particular aspect on it has raid-centricity at it's heart by including the Inscription item and by it being too late to change the very talent designs themselves like AoE Vs ST options which is so complained about. They're not just throwing 4 expansions of raid-centric investment under a bus over this apparent epiphany.

[deadman1]

I'm afraid that is a very niche activity with very tenuous support, at best. Raids are not intended to be soloable, and there are still many encounters that remain impossible to do solo.

That is patently false it's directly promoted by blizzard. They make it easier, nerf drops, maintain mounts, change boss mechanics to be more easily soloable.

- - - Updated - - -

no, to hardcore raidgroups. You know those ones who won't be using legendaries during their progress, who currently boost dozens of people/groups, etc.

They're a minority of raiders.

It's trivial to most progression guilds, not just hyper elite guilds.

Slippery slope fallacy doesn't work unless you point out why their escalation is invalid, btw.

It's invalid because it's ludicrous, switching between mirror image and rune of power is not the same as switching between a mage and a warrior. Implying such is renouncing reality.

[rda]

@rda they attempted to create content for people like us who like challenging solo content and apparently that was the nonstarter. They are now focusing their attention elsewhere. Talent changes like these while needing meetings don't take much to implement.

OK, but I still think they are doing it wrong in that *even* if that's a good idea (I think it isn't, but if), it is stupid to implement it now, because it will irk players and you don't want to irk them when your product is in terrible shape.

[Raiju]

That is patently false it's directly promoted by blizzard. They make it easier, nerf drops, maintain mounts, change boss mechanics to be more easily soloable.

They've only ever changed mechanics on raids that ahve been trivial solo's for a long time. The sole exception to this was due to certain 'gifted' individuals complaining they couldnt solo content they couldnt solo prior to the squish anyway because they were bad - where most cataclysm raids saw nerfs to make sure any semi-alive blue geared 90 could manage 25 hc's, compared to not even being able to do 10hc prior.

[deadman1]

They've only ever changed mechanics on raids that ahve been trivial solo's for a long time. The sole exception to this was due to certain 'gifted' individuals complaining they couldnt solo content they couldnt solo prior to the squish because they were bad - where most cataclysm raids saw nerfs to make sure any semi-alive blue geared 90 could manage 25 hc's, compared to not even being able to do 10hc prior.

That is still direct support from the developer and recognition that people actually do solo raids.

[Raiju]

It's trivial to most progression guilds, not just hyper elite guilds.

30-80k~ a night (using my low end estimates) is trivial to nonboosting guilds? You have to understand that even with mops inflation 50k is considered a lot of gold to many.

@Mush it's not support at CHALLENGING solo content, which is the only relevant thing when talking about min/maxing and expensive consumable use.

[Katchii]

That's fine, but there isn't a good reason to limit talent changing. Using a talent "because it's inconvenient to change" isn't compelling. It's just inconvenient.

Then take your talent choices seriously? I understand the need/ want to switch between talents to be at your absolute best...but honestly only progression raiding guilds truly NEED to be 100% optimal with their damage and healing outputs. Run of the mill folks can get by just fine with "good enough" so they just pick the talen choices they like the most and fit their play style the best and stick with it.

I agree with you though, simply making it inconvenient to switch talents is stupid, the current system works just fine so I see no purpose in changing it.

[deadman1]

30-80k~ a night (using my low end estimates) is trivial to nonboosting guilds? You have to understand that even with mops inflation 50k is considered a lot of gold to many.

You don't actually know how much it will cost your estimates aren't based on anything.

It literally has to be affordable by any group or else it's not a viable mechanic. It needs to be closer to the price of a feast, maybe a bit more.

Also 30k and 80k are drastically different numbers. Plus it's a weekly cost, not a daily cost.

@Mush it's not support at CHALLENGING solo content, which is the only relevant thing when talking about min/maxing and expensive consumable use.

I wouldn't say it's "not supported" I'd just say less people do it.

- - - Updated - - -

Then take your talent choices seriously? I understand the need/ want to switch between talents to be at your absolute best...but honestly only progression raiding guilds truly NEED to be 100% optimal with their damage and healing outputs. Run of the mill folks can get by just fine with "good enough" so they just pick the talen choices they like the most and fit their play style the best and stick with it.

I agree with you though, simply making it inconvenient to switch talents is stupid, the current system works just fine so I see no purpose in changing it.

Not really outside of raiding/CMs, sometimes certain talents are more helpful than other, but I think player freedom is pretty important as long as others aren't affected.

[Raiju]

You don't actually know how much it will cost your estimates aren't based on anything.

It literally has to be affordable by any group or else it's not a viable mechanic. It needs to be closer to the price of a feast, maybe a bit more.

Also 30k and 80k are drastically different numbers. Plus it's a weekly cost, not a daily cost.

It's a cost every raid night, and given 2m as a mount number compared to feasts (that start at over 1k early on in the server) that's around 200k. Settling between 30-80k seems pretty reasonable.

This doesn't need to be affordable for your average group because they can hearth & resummon in, or only use them for progress (which may not even require switching due to continuing on the same boss)

I wouldn't say it's "not supported" I'd just say less people do it.

They don't put in any effort to support it until it's trivial enough that a lot of people are benefited by it. As long as it's "challenging" it's not on their radar - fairly understandably.

[deadman1]

It's a cost every raid night, and given 2m as a mount number compared to feasts (that start at over 1k early on in the server) that's around 200k. Settling between 30-80k seems pretty reasonable.

But the 30k price is assumed at 2k per boss if a raid has 15 bosses, you don't clear all 15 bosses multiple times a week.

Also the 2mil mount isn't supposed to be obtained by everyone therefore using it's price as a way to price other things isn't viable.

This doesn't need to be affordable for your average group because they can hearth & resummon in, or only use them for progress (which may not even require switching due to continuing on the same boss)

If at any point a raid group has to hearth and resummon to respec blizzard have failed because the talent trees and boss mechanics are designed for hot swapping.

It NEEDS to be around the price of a feast or slightly more or the mechanic is nonviable.

[Raiju]

But the 30k price is assumed at 2k per boss if a raid has 15 bosses, you don't clear all 15 bosses multiple times a week.

Also the 2mil mount isn't supposed to be obtained by everyone therefore using it's price as a way to price other things isn't viable.

I mean if it wasn't evident I was using it as a comparison, since we have the yak in mop as a direct inflation comparison there.

If at any point a raid group has to hearth and resummon to respec blizzard have failed because the talent trees and boss mechanics are designed for hot swapping.

It NEEDS to be around the price of a feast or slightly more or the mechanic is nonviable.

So your argument has changed from it will be a trivial price to it SHOULD be a trivial price in your mind. That is all I really wanted to clear up.

[deadman1]

I mean if it wasn't evident I was using it as a comparison, since we have the yak in mop as a direct inflation comparison there.

You don't know what the price will be though, the new reagent has nothing comparable in game.


You're using the mount as a reference for inflation but I'm not convinced that is accurate. Other prices haven't jumped that much therefore I don't think it's accurate.

So your argument has changed from it will be a trivial price to it SHOULD be a trivial price in your mind. That is all I really wanted to clear up.

No it hasn't changed at all don't mix my words.

I initially said it will be trivial because it has to be, now I'm saying it will be trivial because it needs to be.

Proof - nearly identical in context

My initial statement

It has to be or else it won't be a viable mechanic.

My most recent statement.

It NEEDS to be around the price of a feast or slightly more or the mechanic is nonviable.

[Krom2040]

You all are smoking something if you think the inscription item will cost 30k+ gold. That's just totally outside of the realm of reality.

When I read threads this like this, I'm reminded that most people on gaming forums have no clue about game design.