I know it says he is a “Technical Game Designer on World of Warcraft. Balance! Tuning! Spreadsheets!” on his twitter account, but the responses he has made about the beta changes to fury don’t really make sense (heroic strike being removed because the “simple nuance” of being off-GCD does not separate it enough from wild strike).
When I googled him I came to a thread about his response to not enough CC needed in MoP dungeons, especially at the start of the expansion, which also had a sense of “I know better what the general population of wow wants and you being above average means you could not possibly understand what players want from the game.”
Has he always been known to blow off players who enjoy challenge in this game and not give responses to valid concerns such as those related to the current dismantling of MoP fury in beta. The live rotation has so much depth for skilled players but does not prevent players of all skill levels from progressing because the rotation is not punishing if you get the overall goal of the spec. I love change and discovery and was hoping for interesting changes for WoD, not this butchering of our class.
His recent response on the front page about WS and placing it off-GCD also seems like he doesn’t want to even try it because it would mean admitting he was wrong (“It'd feel worse with WS off the GCD. You'd have a *ton* of rotational deadtime. Would feel extremely slow.”)
How does it being off-GCD simply mean more down time? The only difference it makes is that we can squeeze more abilities into CS and then treat it like on-GCD when CS is not applied (I am assuming the 0.5 s CD does not stay since it should probably not been applied). Does he think that the majority of players are too “dumb” to come to a similar conclusion and therefor they should not give them the chance to screw it up?