Development Update: The Road to Shadowlands
Originally Posted by Blizzard (Blue Tracker / Official Forums)
In seven weeks, brave heroes of Azeroth will venture into the Shadowlands to confront the forces of the mysterious Jailer and discover the nature of Warcraft’s afterlife. As our development shifts from implementation of new designs and content, towards polish and tuning of the world we have crafted, I would like to offer a roadmap for what to expect over the coming weeks on our Beta servers.

Introducing 9.0.2

First, on a technical note, players paying close attention to the Beta client may notice that this week’s update bears the designation “9.0.2.” Unlike recent expansions, this time around we will have not one but two client updates, aka patches, in the weeks prior to the official release of the expansion. Development of Shadowlands -specific content (the zones and dungeons of the Shadowlands, covenants, etc.) will proceed with weekly Beta updates in the 9.0.2 branch, while our Public Test Realm runs patch 9.0.1. This approach allows us to get features like the new character customization options and the streamlined leveling experience into your hands sooner in 9.0.1, while allowing the team the maximum possible time to keep polishing the level 51-60 Shadowlands experience in 9.0.2. Our Beta environment will continue to receive weekly 9.0.2 updates, and patch 9.0.2 will go live shortly before Shadowlands officially launches.

Alt Leveling

As we first announced at BlizzCon last year, while everyone’s first trip through the Shadowlands is driven by a linear narrative campaign that grants access to endgame features such as covenants, world quests, and more, we want to offer players who are leveling alts a much more flexible experience. We have had a version of that experience available in Beta for the past few weeks, as alts select their covenant immediately upon first arriving in Oribos, and then can tackle the four zones in any order they choose.

However, we’ve received a couple of points of feedback that have led us to refine this approach: First, a number of testers felt like they weren’t necessarily ready to pick a covenant right away on a new class, and wished they could replay the narrative arc that let them “test drive” each of the active abilities along the way. Second, even for players who were familiar with the overall story by that point, it felt confusing or wrong to play through portions of some zone campaigns out of order or while already a member of a covenant (e.g. doing the main Revendreth arc while already being a member of Renethal’s venthyr).

In this week’s build, alts emerging from the Maw for the first time will be met in Oribos by the mysterious Fatescribe, who now offers an explicit choice between replaying the narrative arc as first-time characters experienced it, or following the threads of fate to their inevitable conclusion and beginning the journey at a point following the climactic events at the end of Revendreth’s story. Characters choosing the latter option will enter the Shadowlands in a state where the entire narrative Campaign has already been completed, with new Bonus Objectives available in locations that were previously central to the Campaign. Lucrative zone-wide objectives for each of the four zones will provide additional structure while allowing alts to roam the Shadowlands as they prefer, earning gear and experience through their choice of a zone’s side quests, bonus objectives, world quests, dungeons, or rares and treasures.

Our goal with this alt experience remains offering more flexibility than ever before on repeat playthroughs, while also allowing alts to begin making progress towards their endgame goals, earning Anima for their covenant’s reservoir or catching up on Renown so that they can hit the ground running when they reach 60. We look forward to hearing feedback on how the new experience feels!

Torghast Progression

A number of players in the past couple of months on Beta have raised concerns about what seemed like excessively lengthy introductory questlines in Torghast, which at their worst could feel like five or six successive tutorials that had to be completed before players could access the “real” feature. In a coming build (likely next week), we’re restructuring the way Torghast is unlocked, such that players can gain full access to the main wings of the tower after completing just a single introductory run that also grants access to the Runecarver. The remaining quests to locate and rescue Jaina and Thrall will be incorporated into a larger questline that spans the six main Torghast cell blocks, rewards legendary crafting materials, and eventually unlocks the Twisting Corridors section at its conclusion.

Speaking of Twisting Corridors, as we finalize tuning, Twisting Corridors should come into its own as the “Challenge Mode” wing of Torghast, offering eighteen-floor runs at a higher level of difficulty than the rest of Torghast, with cosmetic rewards for clearing certain thresholds.

Covenants

Covenants are the centerpiece of Shadowlands and have been the subject of passionate discourse across the community over the past weeks, which has been mirrored by discussion and debate within our team. From the system’s first conception, selecting a covenant was crafted to be a weighty decision, shaping a character’s abilities, cosmetic rewards, and access to endgame story arcs and sanctum systems. A weighty decision almost by definition comes with some amount of stress, whether anxiety about making the “wrong” choice, or just evaluating various pros and cons and wishing there were a way to just get the best of all worlds.

In designing this system, we’ve done what we can to minimize the burden of regret. Those measures should be fully enabled by next week’s Beta release. While picking a covenant at the end of your journey to max level is a weighty choice, it is not a permanent one. If you find that, whatever the reason, you are unhappy with your initial covenant pick at level 60, you need only return to Oribos and you can immediately switch to a different one. Now, if you later wish to rejoin a covenant that you have left, that is slightly more involved: There is a path to redemption consisting of a series of two weekly quests to atone for breaking your vow and to rededicate yourself to that covenant’s cause. These quests are now available for testing in Beta; they are still being tuned, but the intent is that they are largely ceremonial rather than feeling like an arduous grind.

We have also taken steps to ensure that a player who switches covenants, as well as one who reaches max level later on in the expansion, never feels permanently behind as a result. Renown measures the strength of a player’s connection to their covenant and is the main vehicle for unlocking additional Soulbind powers and various covenant perks and rewards. Players primarily earn Renown via weekly quests to gather anima from across the Shadowlands, and to rescue souls from the Maw and restore them to their rightful place in the covenant. If a player has missed any of those quests, however, they will find that they can earn Renown directly through a range of activities such as dungeons, world quests, and PvP, until they are fully caught up. This system will be functional on Beta in the coming weeks.

In short, a player who regrets their covenant choice, and who wants to change their mind, should be able to do so straightforwardly at any point during the expansion, and will be able to reach a state with no long-term drawbacks or disadvantages compared to someone who had been in that covenant all along.

We’ve also heard from many players who, rather than being worried about regretting their choice, would prefer that they not have to choose at all; they have advocated that we offer a way to switch among the various active abilities offered by covenants without friction. But these covenant systems are thoroughly intertwined: Covenant abilities are often modified by covenant-specific conduits and soulbinds; most of those soulbinds in turn are unlocked through covenant-specific narrative campaigns. Granting access to one of these without the others would lead to an incomplete or confusing result. In short, pulling on that thread (or cord, as it were) would unravel the entire fabric of the system. Even so, we would embrace the work required to rebuild the covenant system along those lines if we agreed that it would be an improvement, but we ultimately do not share that view.

Before starting an arena match, engaging a raid boss, or entering a dungeon, a character in Shadowlands can change their specialization, talents (and PvP talents if appropriate), legendary item, other equipment, active soulbind, and chosen path within that soulbind. When it comes to customizing your “loadout” – the set of tools you’re going to take into a given encounter – WoW offers more options than ever before, and you can almost entirely reshape your character on the fly to suit the moment. But as malleable as those choices are, none of them, other than perhaps your specialization, defines your character – they aren’t who you are, but rather what you happen to be doing at any given moment.

Rather than add yet another layer to that decision matrix, we’re trying to do something different here, and let players more meaningfully define their character’s identity and set themselves apart from others who play the same class. And that identity entails a blend of aesthetic preference, narrative experience, and mechanical strengths and weaknesses. From the earliest sketched designs of the covenant system, our goal was for the answer to “what do you play?” in Shadowlands to be “Kyrian paladin” or “Venthyr paladin” rather than just “paladin.” And given the central role of combat and power progression to World of Warcraft as a whole, achieving that goal for most players requires that there be player power implications to covenant choice.

None of this is to say that development on covenants and their powers is finished, or that we are not open to further changes. Far from it. We understand that when we offer a choice between competing packages of strengths and weaknesses, if we’re not careful, especially given social and community pressures, weaknesses can easily overshadow strengths. The satisfaction of having an edge in one type of content doesn’t make up for the frustration of being excluded entirely from participating in another. But while tearing down the entire system may seem to some like the simplest way to avoid that pitfall, we’re committed to working with the community to ensure that players feel viable regardless of their covenant choice.

If you really want to go Kyrian on your rogue, but can’t justify it because every guide currently says that the Necrolords’ Serrated Bone Spike is too good to pass up, or if an otherwise appealing covenant has benefits that seem irrelevant in PvP, those are exactly the sorts of imbalance we want to fix, and your feedback is essential to that process. In the coming weeks, we’ll be doing numerical tuning, making changes to underlying ability designs when needed, and potentially leveraging covenant-specific conduits if a covenant needs some targeted shoring up to ensure that they’re viable in a particular type of content. As our combat team shifts its focus primarily to tuning, we’ll be rolling those changes out to Beta servers ASAP for further testing and iteration.

PvP Itemization

We have been following the constructive feedback about the range of gear available on our PvP vendors, and we agree with the underlying concerns. While WoW is an interconnected ecosystem of different content and systems and we feel that the very strongest characters should be the ones who participate and excel in a wide range of activities, each individual progression path should offer the majority of the tools required for success in that path. The current PvP vendors fall short of that goal.

We are considering a few different solutions, such as reworking the stat coverage of the vendor gear and/or providing PvP-specific bonuses through those items. As soon as we’ve settled on a direction, we’ll share our plan for feedback, and get the changes up on Beta for testing.

Sockets

While we eliminated Warforging and Titanforging in Shadowlands , with the goal of increasing clarity and player agency over rewards, the question of how to handle sockets was not quite as clear-cut. A certain critical mass of sockets across all player gear is essential to support Jewelcrafting as a player profession, and in recent expansions the chance for any endgame item to upgrade to a socketed version gave players of all playstyles the opportunity to interact with the Jewelcrafting tradeskill. At the same time, sockets unquestionably constitute power, and can be every bit as impactful as Warforging.

Trying to balance these considerations, the approach we’ve settled on for Shadowlands is to keep sockets as a random item property, but to allow players to add sockets to their items via a consumable sold by Ve’nari in the Maw (similar to Gouged Eyes in the recent Visions of N’Zoth update). This way all players can take advantage of gems and seeing a socketed item drop offers a short-term efficiency advantage, but in the long run competitive players can still make steady progress towards a best-in-slot gear setup without relying on an additional layer of randomness. Finally, in order to limit the total impact of gems, and the power gap between players with full sockets and those without, in Shadowlands only Helms, Rings, Necks, Bracers, and Belts can have a socket randomly generated or added by Ve’nari. These changes should all be active by next week’s Beta update.

The one thing all the above topics have in common is that they have been driven by your passionate feedback throughout the development process, which has helped shape the game for the better over the course of the past year. And a special thanks to all the testers reporting bugs on Beta – we’ve already fixed thousands of issues based on your reports, and are continuing to work through those reports as we aim to make Shadowlands the best experience it can possibly be when it arrives on October 26.
This article was originally published in forum thread: Development Update: The Road to Shadowlands started by Lumy View original post
Comments 206 Comments
  1. Relapses's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    Where was the goal post set though? I don’t remember them ever saying in the interview that they would ditch it pre 9.0 just that if it doesn’t work out they are willing to get rid of it and just going off fourm outrage or YouTube videos isn’t an actual indication of it not working something even preach has pointed a few times.
    I mean, how else do you interpret "pull the ripcord"? It seemed in the Preach interview that Ion was open to feedback and if the system was flawed (which it still is) that they'd rebuild the system the way it needs to be done. Now, months later, they're saying "well, uh, we're doing this anyway but we look forward to fixing our mistake if it's a mistake but we still think it isn't."
  1. Eapoe's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by otaXephon View Post
    I mean, how else do you interpret "pull the ripcord"? It seemed in the Preach interview that Ion was open to feedback and if the system was flawed (which it still is) that they'd rebuild the system the way it needs to be done. Now, months later, they're saying "well, uh, we're doing this anyway but we look forward to fixing our mistake if it's a mistake but we still think it isn't."
    The way I took it is that they have the system already built in to go if a problem arises. I thin what Blizzard is doing is to go live and give it as long as possible to get data if high end raiders are going to stop complaining while letting casual and bad, for lack of a better word, into high end content of m+ and raid spots.
    I think the issue is Blizzard is part head strong stubbornness and part believing in its players to be accepting of casuals. I think that they genuinely want casuals to have the same opportunity without really realizing that high end people still won’t invite them just because Blizzard states it’s okay to be locked into something subpar.
    Regardless, I don’t agree with the system as is because I like to do all kinds of things. Progression raiding (my guild isn’t top 100 or anything but we’ve cleared M N’zoth enough to even get most of our semi raiders the mount), m+ (nothing high but the 15s achievement), casual PvP (I’m not very good), as well as world content and farming old stuff. I like being able to pick things such as Venthyr pure ST, Necrolord fo Cleave/AoE, Night Fae for old content/world, and Kyrian for PvP. As a Hunter the situation exists that every covenant has a place for all content and not being able to swap feels bad.
  1. TEHPALLYTANK's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Araxie View Post
    I absolutely do as well. I'm excited that they're sticking to their guns, but also wanting to correct their weak points that people have issues with, without sacrificing their initial vision that is.
    Their initial vision is built around those weak points, they can't keep their initial vision and correct their weak points. They have to do one or the other, and they're clearly choosing the "screw the players, we're sticking to our vision" option.
  1. Aggrophobic's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post

    It's not a 2 week cooldown, there are two weekly quests so you can switch twice in a week, not once every two weeks. At least that's how I read it.

    For those wanting to switch, it still sucks, but that's significantly better than once every 2 weeks.
    No, you need two weekly resets. It's 2 weeks.
    You can try it out on the beta right now.
  1. Katchii's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggrophobic View Post
    No, you need to weekly resets. It's 2 weeks.
    You can try it out on the beta right now.
    Well that does suck, that's not how I understood the verbiage in the write-up.
  1. Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by otaXephon View Post
    I mean, how else do you interpret "pull the ripcord"? It seemed in the Preach interview that Ion was open to feedback and if the system was flawed (which it still is) that they'd rebuild the system the way it needs to be done. Now, months later, they're saying "well, uh, we're doing this anyway but we look forward to fixing our mistake if it's a mistake but we still think it isn't."
    that if the system has a negative impact on most of the player base they will get rid of it? that kinda info can't be gotten from youtubers or even the forums as the majority of players don't use forums and youtubers can't speak for them. the system was always clearly gonna make it to live where they can gauge is said rip cord needs to be pulled when the masses are actually exposed to it.
  1. Relapses's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    that if the system has a negative impact on most of the player base they will get rid of it? that kinda info can't be gotten from youtubers or even the forums as the majority of players don't use forums and youtubers can't speak for them. the system was always clearly gonna make it to live where they can gauge is said rip cord needs to be pulled when the masses are actually exposed to it.
    That was very clearly not the context that Ion used when he said that.
  1. Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by otaXephon View Post
    That was very clearly not the context that Ion used when he said that.
    it was even cleaner that it was never about people complaining on the fourms before launch unless you thought ion was talking about pugging in the beta or some thing stupid.
  1. Gaidax's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by glszino View Post
    We are going to see so many tears from players who can't get into PUG because of their covenant choice.
    Covenants not being a trivial switch like talents is what will keep it sane.

    There is one thing to ask for specific spec, as you can switch it immediately, but whole another deal covenant. That's why M+ runs that need a rogue, druid or any other class - will first and foremost try to get said class.

    The only case where I see this covenant scrutiny be a thing is a bleeding edge PvE or PvP where every % counts. Not for your shitty weekly +10/15, where you just need a rogue to press shroud or healer to heal and anything more than that is just a bonus.
  1. Reead's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight Meta View Post
    Well that still kinda kills the point, does it not? If I complete the first 18 floors then jump in to start at 19; I will miss all of the Rougelike buffs we get throughout Torghast; will I not? That sort of defeats the whole purpose, doesn't it? Floor 19 CANT be higher tuned than floor 18 at that since again; We would have no power ups / buffs. From the wording of it; you may as well just say that "It's 18 floors max and you can just run that over and over" - The fun would be to truly have an infinite run where Blizzard just tossed the scaling out the window to match the crazy amount of powers one would get as you climb higher. Apart from just being called "Floor 19+" I don't get what separates it from a fresh run from floor 1 again.
    Floor 19 is tuned harder than Floor 18, and you'll need to complete it with only the powers you find on the first floor. This is the challenge of Torghast. It's been this way since Alpha, so nothing has changed. I was able to spend a brief period with it on beta and pushed to floor 38.

    You're not aware of just how insane the scaling is, and how infinitely these anima powers stack. Past a certain point, without an anima power reset, the only challenge would be staying awake long enough to keep mindlessly one shotting every mob on every floor until you pass out from exhaustion. At one point I had SW: D critting for 10 million damage, and my own health was higher than it is in 8.3 at ilvl 480 prior to the stat squish.
  1. Relapses's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    it was even cleaner that it was never about people complaining on the fourms before launch unless you thought ion was talking about pugging in the beta or some thing stupid.
    Brother, I don't even know what you're going on about. Blizzard very clearly said {x}. Then they said "well.........y'know, {x} might still be an option but we're gonna do {y} for now." That is moving the goal post. You can try to play mental gymnastics and frame what Ion said as something different but the intention was incredibly clear and we have every right to meme Blizzard for saying one thing then doing another (again, for like the hundredth time at this point).
  1. Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by otaXephon View Post
    Brother, I don't even know what you're going on about. Blizzard very clearly said {x}. Then they said "well.........y'know, {x} might still be an option but we're gonna do {y} for now." That is moving the goal post. You can try to play mental gymnastics and frame what Ion said as something different but the intention was incredibly clear and we have every right to meme Blizzard for saying one thing then doing another (again, for like the hundredth time at this point).
    that just flatly didn't happen. Ion went on at length about how the rip cord was a last ditch thing they would do if they couldn't get the tuning right and it was widely negatively effecting players post launch hell i'm pretty sure he even said some things like they might try and get it right in patches post launch. There was never any talk about changing it pre launch due to beta feedback/people complaining on the fourms.

    The goal post you think they moved just never existed.

    edit

    just went ahead and skipped to the end of there interview for an actual quote.

    Our goal is to do as much as that as possible during beta then make conservative changes once were live and if somethings a bit out of whack we probably lean towards doing that in a patch in the next tier with alot of of advanced noticed so people can plan around it versus you logged in one day and the rules have changed from out form under you.
    then preach follows up with a question about rather they think this is the best idea where he says.

    we do continue to think that yes, and i think our goal is to. the conversion we would love to have with the community in the next couple of months is what are the biggest problems what are the area's of great worry what are the area's that will make this fail. lets try and target those lets try and sure those up. is there the fall back opinion at the end of the day of removing all of the restrictions and you can just mix and max and change things freely? if we need to pull that rip cord it exist but that is see as a last recourse.
    so ya they were never aiming to change it pre launch from beta feed back that just wasn't a thing they are sticking to exactly what ion said they were going to do. check your self the time stamp is 46:44

    https://youtu.be/MEcXvDDtarc
  1. Relapses's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    that just flatly didn't happen. Ion went on at length about how the rip cord was a last ditch thing they would do if they couldn't get the tuning right and it was widely negatively effecting players post launch hell i'm pretty sure he even said some things like they might try and get it right in patches post launch. There was never any talk about changing it pre launch due to beta feedback/people complaining on the fourms.

    The goal post you think they moved just never existed.

    edit

    just went ahead and skipped to the end of there interview for an actual quote.



    then preach follows up with a question about rather they think this is the best idea where he says.



    so ya they were never aiming to change it pre launch from beta feed back that just wasn't a thing they are sticking to exactly what ion said they were going to do. check your self the time stamp is 46:44

    https://youtu.be/MEcXvDDtarc
    If they weren't ever intending to even entertain the idea, why on earth did Ion spend four fucking paragraphs explaining what -- according to you -- we already knew? I'll tell you why: Because it was not clear that they were not intending to "pull the rip cord" post-launch and a lot of players interpreted this phrase to mean that the possibility of removing the system before 9.0 was still on the table.

    For the record, I fully support a developers' right to go forward with a vision if they feel strongly enough about it -- what bothers me is when they give half-answers or maybes that later turn out to be hollow platitudes meant to prevent further critical mass within sections of the community who feel strongly about things. Don't mention a fucking rip cord if the rip cord doesn't exist.
  1. Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by otaXephon View Post
    If they weren't ever intending to even entertain the idea, why on earth did Ion spend four fucking paragraphs explaining what -- according to you -- we already knew? I'll tell you why: Because it was not clear that they were not intending to "pull the rip cord" post-launch and a lot of players interpreted this phrase to mean that the possibility of removing the system before 9.0 was still on the table.

    For the record, I fully support a developers' right to go forward with a vision if they feel strongly enough about it -- what bothers me is when they give half-answers or maybes that later turn out to be hollow platitudes meant to prevent further critical mass within sections of the community who feel strongly about things. Don't mention a fucking rip cord if the rip cord doesn't exist.
    your really asking why they would make an official blue post instead of just relying on the millions of players who play wow to watch one youtubers video? I mean really? The quote is right there if any one interpreted that way it was them making stuff up all on there own as ion was incredibly clear there was no half hearted answer or hollow platitudes he flatly told preach and every one who was watching the plan and then followed though with said plan in the following months.

    the rip cord is there you just fabricated when it would be pulled all on your own.
  1. Soluna's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Omedon View Post
    Boom, covenant intended as conceptual identity choice, as I've always said. And there it is. If your character doesn't have a strong enough identity, that's not Blizz's problem. Thank you.
    What's blizz's problem though is making some abilities fun, while the thematics of said covenant not matching at all your character's strong identity.

    I play a blood elf warlock, and I would love to play Venthyr covenant for the aesthetics, I think a blood elf with vampire aesthetics would look badass. But unlucky for me, because Necrolords is the only covenant with an ability that has interactions with both destruction and affliction that are FUN. For destro it opens the way for a single target/cleave fire based build instead of chaos bolt focused, and also gives them a strong aoe kit for m+.

    Meanwhile, Affliction becomes an execute niche class that is at least on par with warrior execute-dmg wise, with priority dmg on main target due to multi dotting. The other 3 covenants provide no interesting gameplay, and are just boring 'press every X amount of time to do a bit of dmg' with 0 interactions with talent builds or spells aside from Malefic Rapture (even that is tiny as fuck).

    But I don't think that my character fits the necrolords theme. So for the first time ever, I have to pick either LOOKS, or FUN gameplay, while I could pick both previous expansions, if you can't see the problem with this, then you are in the wrong 100%.

    And no, it is not a meaningful choice if you have to pick glamour or fun in gameplay. It's like playing an RPG, and being told that you can either pick a fiery glow for your sword, and then throw oil at the enemies, then the fiery glowy sword's swing generating sparks that can interact with the oil and ignite the enemy, burning them, or picking a silver sword, that gives you a flat damage increase, but has 0 interactions with anything. They both deal the same damage (if we go by blizz's ideal universe where they will somehow balance all covenants), but the fiery glowy sword is a lot more fun to play with. So like you don't want to go for the extravagant look of a fiery sword, but due to that, you get completely gimped, and your sword is just made of a different metal, which has 0 interactions with your gameplay. This is what covenants are like for warlocks.
  1. munkeyinorbit's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Solry View Post
    So your choice is not meaningful if you have the option to change your mind? Sticking to the thing you like even when presented with other options is not meaningful? Sorry to break it to you, but then anything you ever did in your life choice-wise is not meaningful by that logic.
    That's not what I said. You know you don't have an argument when you have to twist or make up things to support your case.
  1. Soluna's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Araxie View Post
    I absolutely do as well. I'm excited that they're sticking to their guns, but also wanting to correct their weak points that people have issues with, without sacrificing their initial vision that is.
    I don't know, maybe they could then fix the covenant abilities that people have been giving feedback on throughout the entire alpha/beta, and are still broken or super underwhelming/unfun? It's bullshit until it happens. It all just feels like a massive PR bubble.
  1. munkeyinorbit's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Lulbalance View Post
    This will 100% turn into 'what cov are you?' when pugging.
    No it won't. I have only ever been asked if I have done content before in over 15 years of wow. Never had to link legendaries, prove corruptions, prove esscences, tell them my neck or artifact level, or told them how.much gold I have. I have a guild but I do pug on alts and covenants will never be an issue for me.
  1. Relapses's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by munkeyinorbit View Post
    No it won't. I have only ever been asked if I have done content before in over 15 years of wow. Never had to link legendaries, prove corruptions, prove esscences, tell them my neck or artifact level, or told them how.much gold I have. I have a guild but I do pug on alts and covenants will never be an issue for me.
    "This never happens to me, so it can't happen to anybody else ever."

    Man, if only the world really was this simple.
  1. glszino's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidax View Post
    Covenants not being a trivial switch like talents is what will keep it sane.

    There is one thing to ask for specific spec, as you can switch it immediately, but whole another deal covenant. That's why M+ runs that need a rogue, druid or any other class - will first and foremost try to get said class.

    The only case where I see this covenant scrutiny be a thing is a bleeding edge PvE or PvP where every % counts. Not for your shitty weekly +10/15, where you just need a rogue to press shroud or healer to heal and anything more than that is just a bonus.
    mmmh I really think that it will make it worse than it currently is. There are 50 DPS in the waiting list for 3 DPS spots when you create a group in the M+15-20 keys. If you don't have the right covenant for your class, good luck.

Site Navigation