It is time to finally un-marry PvP from PvE completely and END the suffering

[Hegemonia]

After talking with numerous friends, EVERYONE is pissed off at something - both PvPers for the PvE-related changes, and vice versa.

I don't see how Blizzard can overlook the fact that every new patch is met with horror - the justified horror that things will get even messier. At least between patches we have time to get used to current imbalances and somewhat adjust (like immediately leave when I see hunter in 2v2).

After playing a lock exclusively in PvP ever since I started mine in June 2006 I am sick of the roller-coaster that PvP has turned into.

Specs for all classes range from un-playable in PvP and boringly OP to awkward and way too much comp-depending.

Right now I see I do different damage in PvE than I do with PvP with the same gear anyway. Well JUST TAKE THE NEXT LOGICAL STEP - MAKE SPELLS DIFFERENT IN PVP AND PVE.

Can you imagine how many issues this will solve - like Affliction being viable in PvP and not imba in PvE, etc. I'm sure you guys can give other examples for different classes.

[Nopkplease]

Although this is the perfect solution, I think the problems lies with the fact that it would take away precious resources from PvE content development, resulting in delaying content update.

It's all about dollars and keeping the masses happy. All I do is pvp too, but unfortunately pvp participation is steadily declining.

[Dabrix32]

Blizzard seems to want to alienate both raiders and pvp players. I guess their dream game is one filled with nothing but terrible players.

[aevitas]

Although this is the perfect solution, I think the problems lies with the fact that it would take away precious resources from PvE content development, resulting in delaying content update.

It's all about dollars and keeping the masses happy. All I do is pvp too, but unfortunately pvp participation is steadily declining.

No offense but to be 100% fair they will most likely end up saving a whole lot of time instead of the ping-pong game they are playing for years now.

This constant nerfing and buffing just doesn't make sense, split the 2 things like the OP said and you can balance things a lot better. Right now whenever they make a change either side will start crying as it will nerf either a pvper or pve'er to oblivion.

It will take quite some resources at first, yes.. But it will save a lot of time and hassle in the long run and make things a lot less complicated.

[l33t]

Agreed completely, it should've been done years ago. It solves totally everything. We could finally have pve-competitive "pvp" specs like Arms and Sub, and pvp balance issues would never, never again harm pve.
Too bad Bliz would never do this, because for some reason they transmuted themselves from devs send from heavens into greedy, lazy bastards long time ago.

[Lolcraft]

Aff is viable in PvP.

[Hegemonia]

I think that at the end this could save development time and resources and will not necessarily consume more of them. The time they can save in balancing, for example, when balancing will be much easier.

Just slap a damage range and SP-multiplier to Corruption in PvE, then do the same in PvP, and if it doesn't balance change one OR the other.

This is better than what they are currently doing: nerfing Y spell to accommodate for the fact that X spell is overpowered and then someone finds a way to use X even better (through a special situation or a trinket) and then they nerf X, and the class is shit because they nerfed Y before that.


Or the way it is right now - everybody knows a spell is OP in PvP but they don't want to nerf it because it will affect PvE. And then we need to wait 3 months for a major "re-balancing" patch that will compensate the class in some way or another when they need an outright nerf in PvP.

[Deleted]

Blizzard is well aware of this option. They have rejected it thus far and will most likely continue to do so.

[Olrox]

As practical as it is, I can't see the developers thinking it's a bad idea holistically - they probably see it as a bad idea because it represents an enormous task.

I mean think about GW2 - it was built for this from the ground up; they didn't have to dismantle their existing ability construction for an expansion - the game was built with the accepted idea that abilities will have two forms so every single aspect of them was doubled from the start.

I think if WoW were being given a total overhaul for a relaunch or final expansion or something (akin to RO's "Renewal" re-balancing patch which overhauled everything from abilities to pvp to the levels and health of all the mobs in the game, more or less) I think they may do it for long-term health but I think they are just going to stick with the short-term "ping-pong" model for now.

[Deleted]

It's something I've been asking for them to do for years, it's an obvious fix that would solve 90% of balance issues on both sides of the game. Last I checked was the excuse that "It would confuse new players, having an ability that does X damage on NPCs but Y on players"... yet there are multiple abilities in-game that do different amounts of damage/CC to players already, most of which aren't even labelled such but we still get on fine.

[Frogged]

Blizzard seems to want to alienate both raiders and pvp players. I guess their dream game is one filled with nothing but terrible players.

This one made me chuckle a good bit, mostly due to it being painfully true. The dream game for Blizzard: 20 million people paying subscriptions to log in and tend the farm once a day.

[Dabrix32]

The dream game for Blizzard: 20 million people paying subscriptions to log in and tend the farm once a day.

and play Pokemon...GOTTA CATCH THEM ALL!

[Revak]

Agreed. They seem to use that comment about taking resources away from development a lot in their responses for requests....yet content (raids, dungeons, etc) seems to be getting less and less. So why not just have an excuse for less content be a good one; separating pvp and pve. After they get it done maybe it will free up some resources for the future as they will not have to spend so much time on this every patch.

[Luxeley]

Great point and I completely agree! However, take a quick look at the trend regarding talents - 72 to 32 to 6. If anything, WOW is becoming stupider with each patch and dumber with each x-pac. Doing what you suggest could potentialy solve a problem that is getting worse with each patch, but such a thing adds complexity to the game. And, the current WOW treats complexity like terminal cancer for some reason.

[ComputerNerd]

What would it actually solve ?
Nothing.

The balancing on both sides would be a mess regardless, simply a different mess.
The sheer numbers on both sides are why the balancing is impossible, not simply the PvP/PvE see-saw.
Too many class options, too many spec options.

Great point and I completely agree! However, take a quick look at the trend regarding talents - 72 to 32 to 6. If anything, WOW is becoming stupider with each patch and dumber with each x-pac. Doing what you suggest could potentialy solve a problem that is getting worse with each patch, but such a thing adds complexity to the game. And, the current WOW treats complexity like terminal cancer for some reason.

Or narrow minded players.
The number of talents meant nothing if you were not too blinkered to look at them more closely.
Static increases with the vast majority being absolutely mandatory due to being too good for the numbers, and at the earlier expansions being forced to take awful ones because of them being pre-requisites for ones better later on. A restriction which was later removed with good reason.
Those which offered a 100 percent chance of an effect were only good when completed, and prone to failure before the full points had been spent.
80-90 percent of your so-called choices were never that, unless you really wanted to hurt your performance.

There were right specs which had very little variation, or there were wrong ones where you had the choice you wanted.
The problem now is the talents themselves rather than the framework, some are simply too good or not good enough.
But that is not an issue with the reduced number, and can be improved.
Lots of numbers did not equal choice.

The small quantity clearing the Heroic Raiding Content while it is current shows that the difficulty is there.
The problem is arrogant players who deem any content below them as simply inferior with no consideration that they do not represent the player base anywhere near as much as they like to think.
They only have a bigger mouth to yell with.

[Luxeley]

Blizzard seems to want to alienate both raiders and pvp players. I guess their dream game is one filled with nothing but terrible players.

Sure, why not, stupid people with money to spend make great customers.

[TJ]

It was needed ages ago, it's only mentioned a lot now because balance is completely out of control.

It would solve a lot of things... A LOT.

[Whitepaw]

It would make WoW feel disconnected - and it would also confuse a lot of players who enjoy doing both PvE and PvP.

No thank you.

[Deleted]

It would make WoW feel disconnected - and it would also confuse a lot of players who enjoy doing both PvE and PvP.

No thank you.

Only if the player is dumb/doesn't take a couple of minutes to learn. The spells don't need to be fundamentally different (I don't see why they should), it could just be that the damage numbers are different. Say, for example, that Doom ticks every 3 seconds in PvP for a lot less damage, or simply that Doom does 10k damage every 15 seconds instead of 50k, and so on.

[Rucati]

To be honest if they do that they should just separate WoW into two different games. There's simply no real reason for them to do this, even if they made the abilities work differently do you honestly believe that people wouldn't still constantly bitch about something?

It is 100% impossible to make WoW perfectly balanced, unless they were to give every class the exact same skills and the exact same gear. Simple as that, and people will always complain about balance. Even if every single class was identical, people would still complain.