Did TBC ever get any complaints in its time?

[kary]

This is laughable.

Hmm, lets see.
Back then, you couldn't do dungeons unless you had hard CC, so basically mages/hunters, rogues at a pinch.
Druids couldn't res, so if you had a druid you had to have a class that could res (for pugs, anyway)
Only 1 class was viable as a tank until 1/2 way through the expansion
1/2 of the dps specs did no dps
If you were a mage/lock/priest you *had* to go tailoring or else you were doing it wrong
Melee dps weren't viable at the 5man level, def not in pugs
Raid gear was poorly itemized and was inferior to a lot of 5man gear (wastewalker, looking at you)
Attunements, attunements, attunements
Resistance farming
Rep farming for resistance gear
rep farming for mandatory patterns (relentless meta gem)
Consumables. If you did things at the cutting edge, you had to farm stupid amounts of consumables. The guardian/combat elixir change was put in during TK progression so people wouldn't have to farm 10+ elixirs per attempt. Not to mention that you still had to use haste pots on cd.
Class balance was a joke, it was non existent.
Stupid mechanics like soul shards and arrows still existed. Making hunters/warlocks run with one less bag than everyone else was fair n balanced, yup yup.
Raids being unavailable to most of the public. You have fond memories of kara, yes? 95% sure you did kara when it gave badges, i.e when kara was obsolete for about a year. You couldn't do SSC without Kara, couldn't do mags either. Most of the casual playerbase in TBC dicked around for a year, unable to do anything but 5mans until attunements got removed and instances nerfed to the ground.

These are things that have been successfully fixed thus far. I'm not even going into opinions yet.

Here are a few I remember off hand:

1) You farmed shadow gear for hours to kill Lady Sharraz the first time. Then immediately never wear it again.
2) Prior to 2.4 you had to complete SSC and Eye to get into BT. This attunement quest was excessively long.
3) If your warrior tank wasn't available for illidan's shear, you weren't going to kill him.
4) You should have a paladin tank for Tidewater and Hyjal. Other then that, they weren't needed.
5) Best weapon for paladin tank was best weapon for Mages.
6) Mages were used to get to Bloodboil then sat for the boss because it was too hard to keep more then one of them alive.
7) Alt mages were brought in the clear the trash in sunwell, then you switched back to you main.
8) Your going to sunwell? Your main is a leatherworker for Drums right?
9) Boomkin T6 was only Intellect leather chest piece. It came off Illidan and everyone else should be given priority over the boomkin.
10) Boomkin got mana back from swinging melee weapon at boss.

[Shaderas]

Yeah, don't forget all the claims that rogues were OP because Kalgan's girlfriend played one and it was just another "class balance" scandal at the time.

If I remember correctly (I was taking a break from playing) Rogues WERE ridiculously powerful at some point in BC due to HARP (Hemo + Adrenaline Rush + Preparation). BC opened up enough talent points to take both Hemo and Adrenaline rush and until they fixed it, there was a lot of Rogue hate going on (which seems justified given how powerful it was)

[Akka]

3) If your warrior tank wasn't available for illidan's shear, you weren't going to kill him.
4) You should have a paladin tank for Tidewater and Hyjal. Other then that, they weren't needed.

Paladin main tanking Illidan
You're welcome.

Hmm, lets see.
Back then, you couldn't do dungeons unless you had hard CC, so basically mages/hunters, rogues at a pinch.

Again another myth (though one which was actually often claimed at the time).
Of course it's barely truer than the amount of ilvl asked for 5-man today (which is far above what the instance drop, while it should be below).

Druids couldn't res, so if you had a druid you had to have a class that could res (for pugs, anyway)

They could, but their rez was the battle rez (so on a 10 mn timer, but usable in combat). I did prefer the fact that not all healers were the same and each had their unique style and unique tricks.

Remember tank paladins with passive mitigation being the only viable group tank..

Yet again another forum idiocy that has little to do with reality.
Tankadin were easier because of AoE threat, but they were absolutely not "the only viable".

Half of this thread is a compilation of garbage clichés and forum wankfest compounded by ignorance. It would be comical if said idiocies didn't spill over other discussions where the same clowns use such "facts" (i.e. : myths) as arguments.

[kary]

Paladin main tanking Illidan
You're welcome.

Again another myth (though one which was actually often claimed at the time).
Of course it's barely truer than the amount of ilvl asked for 5-man today (which is far above what the instance drop, while it should be below).

They could, but their rez was the battle rez (so on a 10 mn timer, but usable in combat). I did prefer the fact that not all healers were the same and each had their unique style and unique tricks.

Yet again another forum idiocy that has little to do with reality.
Tankadin were easier because of AoE threat, but they were absolutely not "the only viable".

Half of this thread is a compilation of garbage clichés and forum wankfest compounded by ignorance. It would be comical if said idiocies didn't spill over other discussions where the same clowns use such "facts" (i.e. : myths) as arguments.

Okay, you *could* do a dungeon with melee, but with 360% cleaves and mortal strikes, why would you? Same thing with CC. You had poor aoe threat, poor aoe healing, why would you run with classes that couldn't cc? of course you could, but did you?

Tankadins weren't a thing outside shattered halls till hyjal.

Only having a combat res on a 10 min cd in dungeons where cleaves could oneshot melee sounds like a fantastic idea with a lot of runbacks.

[Akka]

Okay, you *could* do a dungeon with melee, but with 360% cleaves and mortal strikes, why would you?

360° cleaves were brief and were patched out quickly after TBC release, precisely because of that.

Same thing with CC. You had poor aoe threat, poor aoe healing, why would you run with classes that couldn't cc? of course you could, but did you?

1) To play with your friends.
2) To not wait 1h to make a group (but then maybe the reason why so many people complained it was "impossible" to group in TBC while I never found it especially difficult, was because of that ?).
3) It's much funnier to actually have to drag out your bag of tricks and play smartly.

That's plenty reasons enough. The fact you seem to not even comprehend the possibility of doing things not "by the book" is another notch in the argument that so many "truths" about TBC are just forums myths repeated so endlessly they become "facts" in the collective mind - despite being just garbage.

Tankadins weren't a thing outside shattered halls till hyjal.

The other one said that nobody but tankadins were viable in 5-man. Get your act together, guys.

Only having a combat res on a 10 min cd in dungeons where cleaves could oneshot melee sounds like a fantastic idea with a lot of runbacks.

Cf above : the rez could be a combat one, each class was more unique than the homogeneized soup we have today (even with the "class fantasy", which doesn't change a lot in the end), and the cleaves only lasted a short time.

[Irshin]

Again another myth (though one which was actually often claimed at the time).
Of course it's barely truer than the amount of ilvl asked for 5-man today (which is far above what the instance drop, while it should be below).

They could, but their rez was the battle rez (so on a 10 mn timer, but usable in combat). I did prefer the fact that not all healers were the same and each had their unique style and unique tricks.

Yet again another forum idiocy that has little to do with reality.
Tankadin were easier because of AoE threat, but they were absolutely not "the only viable".

Half of this thread is a compilation of garbage clichés and forum wankfest compounded by ignorance. It would be comical if said idiocies didn't spill over other discussions where the same clowns use such "facts" (i.e. : myths) as arguments.

You have to remember that things changed during the expansion itself and Pally tanks didn't really become a regular thing until later in the expansion

5) Best weapon for paladin tank was best weapon for Mages.

That one cracks me up because I had completely forgotten about it, It was a spell power sword and it was funny as heck seeing mages cry that the raid leader had given that sweet spell power sword to the tank they used for trash packs hahahaha.

TBC for me was awesome I was an alliance shaman I had grace of air, wind fury, chain heal, Heroism, and all sorts of fun OP spells that people wanted in their raids I was in high demand and I was happy about it. Ironically it was the fact that every raid absolutely needed a enhance shaman with 4 rogues in a group in order to complete certain content that drove the Devs in to the new Bring the player not the class philosophy something we are all still feeling today. For example even if the raid had and incredibly skilled mage loyal to the guild that out skilled me in every way possible they still sat him and brought me because I had Heroism and WF totem and that just one example form my shaman perspective there where other classes and specs that became just as essential.

[kary]

360° cleaves were brief and were patched out quickly after TBC release, precisely because of that.

1) To play with your friends.
2) To not wait 1h to make a group (but then maybe the reason why so many people complained it was "impossible" to group in TBC while I never found it especially difficult, was because of that ?).
3) It's much funnier to actually have to drag out your bag of tricks and play smartly.

That's plenty reasons enough. The fact you seem to not even comprehend the possibility of doing things not "by the book" is another notch in the argument that so many "truths" about TBC are just forums myths repeated so endlessly they become "facts" in the collective mind - despite being just garbage.

The other one said that nobody but tankadins were viable in 5-man. Get your act together, guys.

You were able to play "what you liked" and "with your friends" months into the expansion, when things became irrelevant.
360 degree cleaves lasted a long ass time, prob even to the patch which removed maggy from TK attunement. I mean I understand if you were in the bush leagues and that didn't affect you, but 360 degree cleaves were in the game long enough to strictly limit the dungeons you could run without a ranged core, at a casual level, anyway.
Yes, progression oriented guilds did stuff back then, but you def wouldn't have randos doing heroic arc or mana tombs or auchenai crypts or basically any hellfire citadel heroic.

[Dire]

LOL @ this thread.

[NihilSustinet]

Never has there been free epics like Molten core in vanilla

There i said it.

Anyway yes TBC was clsoe to worse in class balance then vanilla was.

Many classes had specs that where basicly unplayable above dungeon level content. Class stacking, max debuff count. So many things have gotten better today. People just forget it

Only later on in the expansion, and you still ahd to have some semblance of a 40 man raid group. MC wasn't easy when everyone was in blues, I was in one of 2 horde guilds on my server with any MC gear, all the way until around the time naxx came out, when people started to be able to pug it.

[kary]

Cf above : the rez could be a combat one, each class was more unique than the homogeneized soup we have today (even with the "class fantasy", which doesn't change a lot in the end), and the cleaves only lasted a short time.

Unique =/= useful.
Most of the "unique" specs were hot dogshit. For instance, any non combat rogue, alliance ret paladins, moonkins, ele shamans.
Sure those specs could be clerics and support classes and could "earn" a spot in a raid by buffing others, but on their own they were as useful as balls on a dildo.

[Akka]

You were able to play "what you liked" and "with your friends" months into the expansion, when things became irrelevant. 360 degree cleaves lasted a long ass time, prob even to the patch which removed maggy from TK attunement.

Things didn't become "irrelevant" in the old design. That's a new design invention. Cleaves were removed in 2.1.0, which was just four monthes into the expansion - certainly a long-ass time for the top guilds, but not that long for the majority.
And yes I suffered in dungeons in the meantime (my main was a rogue). Though the glancing blows annoyed me more than the cleaves on the whole.

Unique =/= useful.
Most of the "unique" specs were hot dogshit. For instance, any non combat rogue, alliance ret paladins, moonkins, ele shamans.
Sure those specs could be clerics and support classes and could "earn" a spot in a raid by buffing others, but on their own they were as useful as balls on a dildo.

I already talked about this exagerated bullshit earlier. In fact I spent 90 % of my time in this thread debunking this, and pointing that today's difference between spec is barely better than it was at the time (there is about 20-30 % difference in logs between the best and worst spec today ; that's about the same, at best a bit less, that there was then).

[Kithelle]

Shattered halls was basically a nightmare for Warrior tanks, I believe either Arcatraz or Mechnar was universally hated, the beginning of the casual-crying babies began with attunements, and Karazhan was considered more of a chore than the rose-tinted glasses Candy land that most people present it as. There's probably more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head

Pain in the ass but Kara was a interesting raid...loved doing chess.

[Akka]

Pain in the ass but Kara was a interesting raid...loved doing chess.

Only raid boss I could ever solo on-level

[Valech]

Yes. Even vanilla did. I can clearly remember some game review in one of that time´s gaming magazines, that claimed that wow was only short time entertaining and would die down in 1 or 2 years. Same with tbc.

[kary]

Things didn't become "irrelevant" in the old design. That's a new design invention. Cleaves were removed in 2.1.0, which was just four monthes into the expansion - certainly a long-ass time for the top guilds, but not that long for the majority.
And yes I suffered in dungeons in the meantime (my main was a rogue). Though the glancing blows annoyed me more than the cleaves on the whole.

I already talked about this exagerated bullshit earlier. In fact I spent 90 % of my time in this thread debunking this, and pointing that today's difference between spec is barely better than it was at the time (there is about 20-30 % difference in logs between the best and worst spec today ; that's about the same, at best a bit less, that there was then).

Lol you haven't been debunking anything, you've been giving your recollection on things and only because you have an exaggerated sense of self, you assume that you're correcting things.
Bruh, you've been wrong at every step, but okay. The spec difference wasn't anywhere near 20%, but because logs from that time period (no, private server logs mean absolutely nothing) don't exist or are hard to find, it'll boil down to my recollection vs yours.

And really, who cares about non cutting edge stuff? By the time the patch got out, the content was irrelevant. Yes content became irrelevant, just because you were wiping on gruul when sunwell was out doesn't make it more relevant. (it's 5 months actually, but that's just a nitpick)
In my first posts I very clearly made the distinction between early and late bc. Funny too, cus if you were doomed to 3-4 heroic dungeons and normal modes now, you'd kick up a fit, but BC was somehow amazing for that.

[ohlins]

Exaggerations, everywhere!

[Akka]

Lol you haven't been debunking anything, you've been giving your recollection on things and only because you have an exaggerated sense of self, you assume that you're correcting things. Bruh, you've been wrong at every step, but okay.

Actually, I've had people who said that enh shamans were 30 % below dps classes, that hunters were so bad they weren't taken into Sunwell, that paladins couldn't tank Illidan and weren't used outside 5-man, and all that was debunked with two easy links to video from the time.
That's already a good deal of debunking, and it helps me having much more confidence in what I remember compared to said forum myths - which means that when someone else come and start claiming his recollections are better than mine, yeah I default to believing mine.

The spec difference wasn't anywhere near 20%, but because logs from that time period (no, private server logs mean absolutely nothing) don't exist or are hard to find, it'll boil down to my recollection vs yours.

Yeah, and as I said I trust more my own recollections, because nearly everytime I can manage to find hard data, it back them.
I'm pretty sure that I remember a discussion on EJ where someone talked about some weird rogue spec which went deep into sub to benefit from Sinister Calling, and after some calculation it ended up being something like 10 to 15 % below the top DPS spec. So basically a joke spec had the same difference then than a main spec today (from recent logs, there is about 10 % difference between Outlaw and Sub).

So yeah, today's balance is a bit better (though I'd argue it's actually accomplished by making all classes so alike the tradeoff isn't worth it), but my point is that : not that much.

And really, who cares about non cutting edge stuff? By the time the patch got out, the content was irrelevant. Yes content became irrelevant, just because you were wiping on gruul when sunwell was out doesn't make it more relevant. (it's 5 months actually, but that's just a nitpick)

Actually, nearly everybody care about non-cutting edge, because nearly everybody isn't cutting edge. The beauty of pre-WotLK system was that no, content never became irrelevant, because there was always lots of people who were progressing through all tiers of content - even shortly before 3.0, there were still guilds which were progressing in Karazhan. Because there was much less obsolescence, and the design was pyramidal progression.
(and if you want to nitpick, it was actually 4 monthes and a half, the Dark Portal opened early january, 7 or 9 IIRC, while 2.1 was the 22th may)

In my first posts I very clearly made the distinction between early and late bc. Funny too, cus if you were doomed to 3-4 heroic dungeons and normal modes now, you'd kick up a fit, but BC was somehow amazing for that.

Yes, TBC was amazing for having content which was about progression. Progression has more or less disappeared from the game, and that's one of the main reason I much preferred early WoW.

---

Exaggerations, everywhere!

Pretty much. Forums are mainly about exaggerations.

[Ghrog]

don't you remember the "hybrid tax" drama?

ugh.... excuse me while I go vomit up my soul...

As a player of a Hybrid class (Shaman) that absolutely cannot stand healing, my whole hybrid existence consisted of Ranged DPS or Melee DPS. and Being docked for it was... in a word... infuriating.

[beelgers]

...that paladins couldn't tank Illidan and weren't used outside 5-man, and all that was debunked with two easy links to video from the time.
...

I actually didn't know either way, but to be fair, I took your video more as proof that *generally speaking*, paladins couldn't tank Illidan when current. There were just some impressive exceptions. A very limited amount of people doing something in this game to me indicates there is a balance problem - not that something is possible.

[araine]

it started the system of welfare epics. you could literally afk to epics in BC