Page 1 of 2
1
2
LastLast
  1. #1
    Pandaren Monk ZeroWashu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,965

    So are some classes really justified in having three different specs?

    Ghostcrawler has been mentioning they are trying to differentiate the three styles of rogue and hunter, even to the point where the hunter might be slated for a major revamp. Yet having played all classes, it really feels as if one spec or another is forced. Like they are trying to hard to add variety and end up just muddling it all. I would even go as far as saying the same about priest and warrior, two specs is more than fine for the most parts.

    I would not be at all upset to have only two choices for my rogues or hunters, its iffy on my warrior but honestly the two dps specs aren't that far apart other than mostly visuals in the end. Rogue, I am so single spec there its not even funny.
    iMac
    2012-03-05 : The day SWTOR jumped the shark
    Mages are basically "warlocks for girls" - Kerrath

  2. #2
    I wouldn't say priest or warrior needs it, they are pretty defined. Absorb+smite/raw healing/dps and 2h/DW/tanking.

    Rogues and hunter need it badly. They all feel too similar

  3. #3
    Stood in the Fire grumpyoldman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    475
    IMHO I think a good solution for that would be to give the DPS-only classes (rogue, hunter, mage and warlock) one non-dps spec.

    For example, rogues could have one of their spec changed to tanking. The problem with that is that would be a major overhaul of the entire class just to accomodate the changes. One possible solution I can see to this problem would be making it an 'offtank spec', like it would be able to offtank adds and the like but not the main boss for an extended period of time. So there would be the tank role and the off-tank role. But then again that would mean too much change to the game.

    Still I keep thinking that if roles like off-tank and off-healer existed in this game, or even an spec focused more in control instead of pure dps (and of course bosses and encounters demanding that control), that could be the solution for dps-only classes spec diversity problem. But all these ideas come at the cost of changing the game too much, so I doubt we will see anything like that.
    YOU CAN'T CUT BACK ON FUNDING! YOU WILL REGRET THIS!

    Quote Originally Posted by hrugner View Post
    WoW was always pretty much He-Man regarding the story and the characters.

  4. #4
    Bloodsail Admiral Annarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    1,015
    As someone who has played as a main Warrior and Priest, I whole-heartedly agree with these statements. I'd prefer if it went the old route though, when Disc and Arms were for PvP and the other two specs got smashed in PvP. Considering how easy it is to level these days, I have no problem telling players that if they want to PvP a different role, they need to use the right class for it. It eliminates a whole host of problems, mainly balancing PvP without affecting PvE. Blizzard has come up with some creative strategies over the years, but I think it'd just be easier if one spec sucked at PvE and the other two sucked at PvP.

  5. #5
    Every class needs and deserves their specs to work. I could see having tank specs suck in pvp, but long term, they should have the goal to have every spec viable in pvp and pve.

    And no, I don't want to lose my specs because some hybrid thinks I don't need them. I need them. I just need them to be worth having.

  6. #6
    Other games have done much with the off spec, utility specs. Play Rift from time to time and the thing I really liked about Rifts spec system is the ability to do odd ball things with your specs. Mages have a healing spec, rogues can tank, warriors can play as a somewhat ranged class, and clerics can tank or dps. You also have hybrid builds which can que as support class. It gives a good bit of freedom to play your toon as you would like to. I was just talking to someone a few days ago about how certain classes feel like they only need 2 specs, while you could argue that the monks should have been given 4 specs with the addition ofa caster spec for them. Druids have 4 specs, why couldnt monks? I like the idea of giving some classes a major change and allowing them to do things they couldnt before. Locks thought we were going to get this with dark apothosis but blizz for some reason decided it shouldnt be done...major let down. I know the devs are pretty much set in their ways, but being form the warlock community, I can tell you if enough support is shown for something, and blizzard can see the moajority of the subs want something, they will cave in and make it happen.

  7. #7
    Scarab Lord Gimlix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    The Netherlands!
    Posts
    4,528
    Would be nice if hunters had a spec like Rexxar, would make things interesting =)
    » Active MMO-Champion visitor since: 12-12-2012 «
    » Predict Warlords of Draenor to sell 3 Million copies at first day «

  8. #8
    Scarab Lord nightfalls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    4,233
    I've always said that they should hybridize the pure classes, and not by the "4th spec" bs but by the only true way: Getting rid of a DPS spec, combining it into the other two and making the other two DPS specs more unique, and replacing it with a support role.

    Problem is people can't get over losing even the least played specs in game so it's unlikely to happen.

  9. #9
    I think the talent/glyph system as it stands kinda forces them into a very specific thing that doesn't really mechanically play very differently, and their goals in regards to balance are not really doing them any favors.

    For example, a rogue- Every rogue has Sprint, every rogue has Vanish, every rogue has Preparation, every rogue has the opportunity to take Shadowstep. These are the abilities that really define the decisions that you make, and they're the same for every rogue, therefore every decision the rogue makes is the same. DPS CD x, main rotation button Y, secondary rotation button Z, finisher B, maintain buff C is literally all the difference between the specs, and GC himself even said as much not too long ago.
    If you are particularly bold, you could use a Shiny Ditto. Do keep in mind though, this will infuriate your opponents due to Ditto's beauty. Please do not use Shiny Ditto. You have been warned.

  10. #10
    I don't think warrior and priest need it (priest is pretty well defined one being more traditional healing, the other being absorbs). However that being said I would prefer that they would better define the specs, Arms being the premier PvP and pretty much useless in PvE like it used to be.

    As for the pure dps, I'd agree or at the very least again make one very PvP oriented, PvE based, and perhaps the 3rd be a leveling spec/hybrid of the two?

    When I read about the nerf to stampede (for pvp reasons) followed by 3 ability buffs for bm hunters for PvE reasons I found myself asking "Who the hell plays BM for PvE?" but apparently people do.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeroWashu View Post
    I would not be at all upset to have only two choices for my rogues or hunters, its iffy on my warrior but honestly the two dps specs aren't that far apart other than mostly visuals in the end. Rogue, I am so single spec there its not even funny.
    The problem is that some classes have specs that define roles, and others which define styles of play. And of the two, there are systems in play which can ffect style - Glyphs, talents, stat selection.

    So - no. Most classes don't really need 3 specs. Paladins for example, could easily be a tank/heal hybrid. Rogues and Hunters and Mages could be collapsed into one. Shamans don't really suit the melee archetype. And so on.

    Going even further, each class could - designed properly - be collapsed into one spec.

    EJL

  12. #12
    No, I honestly don't think three specs are necessary for a lot a classes, and, especially with the pure DPS classes, one usually lags far behind the other two and lacks identity.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by volkithewarlock View Post
    Other games have done much with the off spec, utility specs. Play Rift from time to time and the thing I really liked about Rifts spec system is the ability to do odd ball things with your specs. .
    The mage melee in Rift is the most fun I have ever had playing a melee in countless years of playing games. If they ever made a spec like that in wow, I would be set for life.

  14. #14
    I am Murloc! Airwaves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Australia! G-day Mate!... (We don't really speak like that)
    Posts
    5,685
    Yes they should have 3 but they need major changes. Both combat and bm should be tanking specs. Sub should be daggers, mut should be poisons (with any wep type). MM should be bow and surv should be nature damage and traps.
    Angels and Airwaves
    Aldmeri Dominion - Imperial - Templar - Laethys - High Elf - Assassin - Frostmourne - Orc - Rogue - Sea of Sorrows - Norn - Thief
    Borderlands 2 - Mechromancer - Battlefield 4 - Engineer - Diablo 3 - Wizard

  15. #15
    DK = best talent tree (type) because all three tree use totally different playing style yet not worthless in pvp/pve

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Airwaves View Post
    Yes they should have 3 but they need major changes. Both combat and bm should be tanking specs. Sub should be daggers, mut should be poisons (with any wep type). MM should be bow and surv should be nature damage and traps.
    A rogue tanking spec is completely illogical and goes against the fundamental nature of the class.
    Not to mention that sub already uses dagger and assassination is already heavily focused on poison damage.

    To be honest, I don't see why people complain so much about hunters needing more differentiation between specs. Playing the three hunter specs does feel quite a bit different, the only thing I think hunters need is the ability to play petless, like warlocks.
    You tried too hard and now your post is shit. Never try too hard, the gamble isn't worth it. -Boubouille

  17. #17
    Epic! Phookah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Zebes, SR-21
    Posts
    1,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitei View Post
    A rogue tanking spec is completely illogical and goes against the fundamental nature of the class.
    Not to mention that sub already uses dagger and assassination is already heavily focused on poison damage.

    To be honest, I don't see why people complain so much about hunters needing more differentiation between specs. Playing the three hunter specs does feel quite a bit different, the only thing I think hunters need is the ability to play petless, like warlocks.
    If you want to play petless, then hunter isn't the class for you.

    OT: 3 specs are fine, they just could use a little more identity.

  18. #18
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Liverpool, Merseyside
    Posts
    4,393
    Hunter in it's current state no, the specs are pretty much the exact same rotations and 1 is vastly superior, sometimes to spice it up Bliuzz change which spec is better for an expansion.

    I said earlier, make Survival a sort of self healing spec focused on fighting in the shadows and at distance, using snake venom to heal yourself, remove debuffs, boost your stats. Maybe not even a full time pet but you can summon a snake trap sort of thing every couple minutes.

    Just something that sets a hunter spec apart from "send in pet, proc bursts, put serpent sting on, hit signature shot, build focus with focus regen shot".

  19. #19
    The Lightbringer OzoAndIndi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    3,454
    Personally I wouldn't go removing one from them.. Though I think changing one, or adding something new, to at least bring a little bit of a different flavor to the class depending on spec would be nice. Like the assassination Rogue is just that and could have more that makes it FEEL like it, while another spec may be more the special agent, and the third the thief.

    If a 4th spec was added.. While I'm sure some may not agree at all I still think Demon Hunter could make a nice Rogue spec for something that could be fitting but very different for them. Same with making Dark Ranger a spec for Hunters.

  20. #20
    Stood in the Fire Loafy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    478
    Although the old talent tree system you were kind of forced on what talents to take, you had the opportunity to learn several new moves focused on one tree (as someone already pointed out.) I never bothered playing my rogue in MoP so i don't really understand how they are, but it sounds like by trying to implement more choice and variation in the talent trees, they inadvertently eliminated some variation in playstyle.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •