Lets Refocus the Debate.

[Selah]

Currently, and most likely for a long time coming, there has been a lot of discussion around if there should be changes made to Classic. Two groups of people seemed to have emerged from this discussion, one group saying there should be no changes made ever and another saying there should be some changes. The group of individuals who say there should be changes have a very wide array of ideas of what should be changed for Classic and seem to lack any consistencies in what they believe should be changed.

This seems to be a very counter productive conversation, and highly toxic. Granted, any conversation on the internet leans in that direction. There are two truths that will have to be accepted by both groups when it comes to this discussion. The first one being that there will be changes to Classic. If Blizzard can fix a bug, or head off a problem from the past that caused server instability, or reduce lag, they will. Which I think is totally fair and reasonable changes, no one wants a buggy mess that isn't playable. I don't think many people will argue against these changes. However, that by definition is a change to Vanilla, which is a reality no one can escape.

The second is that this project isn't meant to be a Vanilla 2.0, there are a lot of features that are not acceptable changes to make to the game. LFD, LFR, transmog, features of that nature cannot be added to the game. They will absolutely destroy the experience of Vanilla.

So, in hopes of helping create a more productive debate my question to the community is this. What are changes that the team can make to the game that are acceptable?

Personally speaking, I believe that bug fixes, server stability, lag reduction are all acceptable changes. Outside of that the only changes I would argue for are the spec viability. Every spec in the game should be usable instead of 1 in 3. Now what changes that would actually require, I can't say. Outside of those changes, I say leave the game alone.

[Octayvius]

I think a fair compromise for hybrid classes only is to make respecs 1/4th the cost of other classes so they can actually farm or do quests like all the other dps classes in the game do and do it infinitely more effectively.

I think achievements would be a good add in order to provide longevity to the game and incentives to do difficult content or get titles etc, meaningless things to keep us engaged.

The mount and toys tab would be nice but is not needed in reality and can be lived without.

Since the game will not have any flying we should have a conversation about the flight path speeds and if we want those to go up at all. I remember the fight from gadget to darnassus was 15 to 20 minutes, I think the content grinds are great and shouldn't be touched, but this irrationality for no sake other than irrationality, is rather toxic.

[Alydael]

I would agree that I am ok with changes to balance of specs, but not dungeon or raid balance. I would also be fine with updated graphics.

Looking forward to taking a shot at that original Priest quest for the staff, original insane Naxx, AQ when it was relevant. I don't want the difficulty spoiled by "updates."

I didn't start playing until about a month or so before TBC came out, so I wasn't even max level yet when it dropped. I never got to experience those old dungeons and raids when they were relevant.

Did they have DBM back then? Should the new classic have DBM? That's another debate.....

[Grevmak]

The most basic thing no one who's right in their mind would, well, mind is Battle.net integration and Communities. Being able to write to people who are currently playing OW within WoW is nice, and doesn't interfere with playing Vanilla at all.

Also, exploits. If someone finds a dupe glitch/Exploit, it needs to be fixed. No, it's not ok because "that's a vanilla thing tho", it needs to be fixed and Blizz already said stuff like this will be handled in such a way.

[Azadina]

I would agree that I am ok with changes to balance of specs, but not dungeon or raid balance. I would also be fine with updated graphics.

If you are talking about their PvE performance, then those are contradictory.

It's kind of like "I want to eat more pizzas, but not any extra calories".

[Vineri]

There is not much discussion, outside those who think their opinion can sway Classic.

J. Allen Brack:
"I think there will be a lot of tourists" "But it doesn’t matter what I think because once we’re committed to doing this at a Blizzard level, which we are, whatever happens is going to happen. If millions of people show up and play for years, that’s awesome. And if just tens of people show up and play for years, we’re fine either way. What’s important to us is that we have this Classic experience people can enjoy, that people do have the opportunity to go back to. This is an important game in videogame history and there’s not a way to go back and experience that today. This is also about preserving something that we think is really important."
src:
http://www.pcgamer.com/this-is-how-b...a-wow-servers/

See the part about preservation? You think they will take advice from some retail zombies? Retail people play whatever is given to them, like Blizzard's personal pets. Blizzard knows this, and this do not intend to change Vanilla / Classic. Or did Brack lie? Mmm hmm...

[Deleted]

Hate to keep repeating myself, but LFD was in the game.. check out patch 1.5 Meeting Stones. You'd click on the Meeting Stone and get automatically matchmade with other people who did the same. In a later patch they made it so you can queue from Innkeepers for local dungeons, and in 2.0 prepatch they removed the whole thing since it was broken and no one was using it, and they re-iterated on it in WotLK. Meeting Stones only got their summoning role with 2.0.

So the question is, should this broken feature be fixed now that they have the tech? It WAS in Vanilla, after all. I would be in favor of Premade Group Finder instead of automatic matchmaking like Meeting Stones, if only so you can find people for your groups while still questing instead of AFKing in capitals, but apparently not AFKing in capitals breaks the experience for a lot of people~~.

[Vineri]

Hate to keep repeating myself, but LFD was in the game.. check out patch 1.5 Meeting Stones. You'd click on the Meeting Stone and get automatically matchmade with other people who did the same. In a later patch they made it so you can queue from Innkeepers for local dungeons, and in 2.0 prepatch they removed the whole thing since it was broken and no one was using it, and they re-iterated on it in WotLK.

So the question is, should this broken feature be fixed now that they have the tech? It WAS in Vanilla, after all. I would be in favor of Premade Group Finder instead of automatic matchmaking like Meeting Stones, if only so you can find people for your groups while still questing instead of AFKing in capitals, but apparently not AFKing in capitals breaks the experience for a lot of people~~.

Nobody used that garbage. Seriously.

It wasn't LFD, don't even go there.

[clevin]

Personally speaking, I believe that bug fixes, server stability, lag reduction are all acceptable changes.

Sure, that's reasonable

Outside of that the only changes I would argue for are the spec viability. Every spec in the game should be usable instead of 1 in 3. Now what changes that would actually require, I can't say. Outside of those changes, I say leave the game alone.

No, for 2 reasons:

1) Spec changes are gameplay and you should get Vanilla if you spent the last several years asking for it.
2) If you change specs materially you probably need to adjust the encounters because those and the specs interact.

That's the essence of the slippery slope argument - in any complex system if you change one thing it almost always affects others. So then you have some reason to change those. And... so on.

Now... if they capped respec cost at, say 5 gold, leaving everything else the same? Technically that's a QoL change but I could easily see that happening since the impact is minimal and likely only on the economy.

[Deleted]

Nobody used that garbage. Seriously.

It wasn't LFD, don't even go there.

Yeah. I think I said so, didn't I? The problem was that the difference between the "recommended" level ranges for dungeons and what most groups could realistically handle was way too large. So say if the minimum level for Deadmines was 15 according to the game, and you got a full level 15 group, you were probably going to have a bad time on the boat.

It absolutely was LFD, it was automatic matchmaking, how is it different from retail LFD, other than having to talk to an NPC?

So are they going to fix it or not? It was most likely a technical issue which has long been resolved. Would it clash with Vanilla design ethos? I dunno, they put it in the game at the time so they didn't think so back then. I don't really want it, all I really want is a tool to connect with people for dungeons while questing instead of AFKing in cities spamming /1 and /4. Yes, the obvious answer to this is "Guild chat", but meeting new, random people was half the charm.

[Bloodclaut]

The LFG system didn’t work because there are often different ways to groom a dungeon run.

BRD for example could be 7D runs, Lava runs, arena farm, Jailbreak quest.

Also people often looked for specific classes or specs to join their group to complete it. Dungeons weren’t as easy back then. You needed to build the proper group and have necessary CC and adequately geared/knowledgable people. Not to mention items to summon additional bosses or open doors (UBRS key, scepter for Maraudon etc..).

Auto grouping was just not a sufficient way to build groups back then, the dungeons weren’t just blind zerg fests like they are in retail. Dungeons also had multiple paths and weren’t hallway style like they became in TBC.

———————-

Additionally I agree with bug fixes/performance updates so that you dont lag out in AV blizzard spam, but other than that no changes. No sped up fp times and MOST DEFINITELY no spec balance for classes. Heal as feral or ret like everyone else if you can’t afford a respec. Its just the way the game is and changing that would be altering way too much. I’m not against cheaper respecs but changing the balance is going too far.

I also enjoy class balance but I can wait for TBC when that actually was a thing, which I think will inevitably happen now that this legacy door has been opened.

Also the graphics don’t need updating. Smoothing out some textures that are hardly noticeable is okay, but beyond that Vanilla is beautiful and doesn't need a makeover.

[Molvonos]

I think a fair compromise for hybrid classes only is to make respecs 1/4th the cost of other classes so they can actually farm or do quests like all the other dps classes in the game do and do it infinitely more effectively.

I think achievements would be a good add in order to provide longevity to the game and incentives to do difficult content or get titles etc, meaningless things to keep us engaged.

The mount and toys tab would be nice but is not needed in reality and can be lived without.

Since the game will not have any flying we should have a conversation about the flight path speeds and if we want those to go up at all. I remember the fight from gadget to darnassus was 15 to 20 minutes, I think the content grinds are great and shouldn't be touched, but this irrationality for no sake other than irrationality, is rather toxic.

What constitutes as a hybrid? Anything not pure DPS (Rogue/Mage/Hunter/Warlock)? Warriors are Tank/DPS, Priests are Healer/DPS (though at least one SPriest is manditory).

There aren't enough toys in Classic to warrant a tab. Mounts are extremely expensive, so I don't see many people needing a mount tab.

Achievements are good, they give people reasons to do things, if people are looking for those reasons. Farming Timbermaw Rep, for example, is utterly pointless except for the sake of doing it.

[Selah]

Sure, that's reasonable


No, for 2 reasons:

1) Spec changes are gameplay and you should get Vanilla if you spent the last several years asking for it.
2) If you change specs materially you probably need to adjust the encounters because those and the specs interact.

That's the essence of the slippery slope argument - in any complex system if you change one thing it almost always affects others. So then you have some reason to change those. And... so on.

Now... if they capped respec cost at, say 5 gold, leaving everything else the same? Technically that's a QoL change but I could easily see that happening since the impact is minimal and likely only on the economy.

I think there's been a bit of miscommunication. I'm in favor of keeping respeccing as it was. Let the cost inflate as you do it more, that's fine with me. I was talking about the specs being viable in combat. E.G. Prot Pally is viable as a tank.

[clevin]

I think there's been a bit of miscommunication. I'm in favor of keeping respeccing as it was. Let the cost inflate as you do it more, that's fine with me. I was talking about the specs being viable in combat. E.G. Prot Pally is viable as a tank.

I address that. Read again. You cannot change the specs without affecting gameplay which means that you'd need to retune the encounters which means... etc etc.

Aside from anyone just trolling, why are you all asking for changes to Vanilla when you've spent YEARS telling everyone you want Vanilla back? I do not get that. It utterly mystifies me that people would spend so much effort, get what they've been asking for, then immediately say "Well, we actually don't want that, we want it changed to this..."

[Bloodclaut]

I think there's been a bit of miscommunication. I'm in favor of keeping respeccing as it was. Let the cost inflate as you do it more, that's fine with me. I was talking about the specs being viable in combat. E.G. Prot Pally is viable as a tank.

This game you speak of is not even close to Vanilla. This is one of those extreme changes that just will not preserve the game. Late TBC is the version you want and I can assure you that its extremely fun and I can’t wait for this to happen one day.

[Stormspellz]

graphical updates, anything more then its not really classic anymore.

[Azadina]

I think there's been a bit of miscommunication. I'm in favor of keeping respeccing as it was. Let the cost inflate as you do it more, that's fine with me. I was talking about the specs being viable in combat. E.G. Prot Pally is viable as a tank.

Then you need to make enha shaman a viable tank too. You know they are the horde version, and lack in the same areas as prot pala? Oh, and you need to make tank gears for both too.

[Vineri]

It absolutely was LFD, it was automatic matchmaking, how is it different from retail LFD, other than having to talk to an NPC?

By reading what you said, you clearly did not play Vanilla; rather you read patch notes, to which you keep quoting.

Sink further into this, and tell me more about how it actually operated?

[Cronovey]

I think there's been a bit of miscommunication. I'm in favor of keeping respeccing as it was. Let the cost inflate as you do it more, that's fine with me. I was talking about the specs being viable in combat. E.G. Prot Pally is viable as a tank.

This wouldn't remotely keep the encounters balanced the same. Having specs like bookin, ret pally, feral druids, elemental shaman, etc all playable and "balanced" specs would completely change how some encounters played out because of unique buffs and abilities that only certain specializations had back then. There is no way to rebalance specs of classes without affecting the balance of dungeon/raid bosses at the same time.

[Sticky]

I sure hope only Shaman have Lust...