ML changes kinda expose the problem with the WoW Forum community

[lappee]

Seems you are not very good at math. More loot, is more loot. You don't get more useful loot when you get less loot. And you don't have any higher chance of getting useful loot with master loot than you do with personal. And this idea that master loot made any significant difference on progression outside of the absolute bleeding edge is pure hogwash, my buddies that just got Mythic Argus down with a world 537th kill a few weeks ago absolutely did not get there because they used master loot. In no way was that effective as long as they had been raiding Antorus they were well and beyond the required gear needed to down that boss. Same can be said of the most guilds that have killed it.

The rest of your drivel is just that...we don't have rules against say theft and murder because everyone is a thief or murderer or even just a potential one, but because the potential for those things to happen exists. What's so hard for you to understand that Blizzard decided that it just isn't okay for players to be able to screw people out of loot anymore? They don't have to justify their actions, they are not subject to you and your ideas about what's fair or what's not.

I'm good at math but you have difficulties with reading comprehension (or with general understanding). I said that PL grants more loot but not all loot is useful, with ML you could assign ~all loot so that its useful. ML provides less loot but you can utilize more of it making it better.

If masterloot doesn't make a big difference then, as I said earlier, people have no reason to use it as a reason to remove ML.

I'm quite capable of understanding that Blizzard is doing the change, doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it. Besides removing ML doesn't mean that players aren't going to "screw people" out of loot, as I've explained many times before.
Just like GCD change, people are discussing this even though Blizzard is implementing it but feel free to say your mantra to them as well - infact go and tell it to everyone that wants something to change.

[Cyranis]

I'm good at math but you have difficulties with reading comprehension (or with general understanding). I said that PL grants more loot but not all loot is useful, with ML you could assign ~all loot so that its useful. ML provides less loot but you can utilize more of it making it better.

Better for whom? At what cost? We know it's better for mythic guilds. We know it has benefits. The costs have been determined to be too high to justify keeping the ML system in place.

If masterloot doesn't make a big difference then, as I said earlier, people have no reason to use it as a reason to remove ML.

It can also easily be said that since the player base effected by this change is so small, there will be very little disruption as opposed to keeping it. Which again falls into costs.

I'm quite capable of understanding that Blizzard is doing the change, doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it. Besides removing ML doesn't mean that players aren't going to "screw people" out of loot, as I've explained many times before.

They can try. I don't see it working out very well, but who knows.

Just like GCD change, people are discussing this even though Blizzard is implementing it but feel free to say your mantra to them as well - infact go and tell it to everyone that wants something to change.

Discuss away. I hope when you do though, you realize that .. it doesn't hurt you leave my loot method alone .. yer not mythic shut up you haven't earned the right to discuss this .. and you agreed to the guild rules, it's your own fault .. wont fly with us .. or with blizzard.

[lappee]

Better for whom? At what cost? We know it's better for mythic guilds. We know it has benefits. The costs have been determined to be too high to justify keeping the ML system in place.

Better for everyone, you'll get more loot that is useful. After that its in the players hands, no guild can run without raiders and if ML is bad for the guild then there shouldn't be a guild. You accepted those rules when you joined the guild, much like you accepted that the GM is in control of the money the guild generates.

There has been no determination of the cost being too high, infact there has been the exact opposite - determination that theres no reason to remove ML.

It can also easily be said that since the player base effected by this change is so small, there will be very little disruption as opposed to keeping it. Which again falls into costs.

The playerbase gaining anything from this change is a fraction of the playerbase the whole change affects negatively. So, if it falls into costs then it shouldn't be done.

They can try. I don't see it working out very well, but who knows.

"Trade the loot or be kicked", yeh its the same situation as with ML only this time you get that one piece of loot extra. It is already happening in pugs and its just gonna spread wider when Mythic loot (the loot that matters the most) is using that system.

[Lilija]

So it took me a while but I wanted to give the topic some more in depth thought and then real life stuff so not enough time to do so. But I guess I've got somewhere.

I am not defending Master Loot. I thought I made that clear. And even if both have the potential to screw the group, then at least players have the option to pick their poison. I can not be in favor of removing all choice simply because it MIGHT cause problems for some people.

Which makes a lot of sense that I agree with in a theoretical scope. However, in the limited scope of raiding and loot, we can absolutely say that removing options is OBJECTIVELY less. Player agency is being reduced without any counterbalancing gain.

TALENTS: Illusion of choice. Even right now today there are cookie cutter builds. However, I'm willing to concede that this is a wash, since while there is still the ability to choose, the choices are often sub-optimal. The new talent system simply boils down those options to 7 clicks instead of 1 for each talent point in the old system.

VALOR: Being able to determine for yourself how and when and where to upgrade instead of just going back to the slot machine and pulling a lever.

GEMMING/REFORGING: Once again, being able to choose how and when and where to upgrade or modify. Gemming right now is a slot machine through Titanforging. Reforging allowed you to mitigate the slot machine of a bad drop. Was it the best way of doing that? Probably not. But still better than limiting you only to the slot machine.

FLYING: That was actually one of the major points that Anti-flight people used to defend the removal of flying. They couldn't choose to walk on the ground because flying was too good. Their immersion was ruined because other people could fly.

But not only that, Blizzard wanted to dictate how players interacted and experienced the content. They wanted to tell people they had to ground pound instead of letting the player choose for themselves. Presentation of content was the arguing point, which disregarded a player's ability to choose if they even cared about the presentation in the first place.

I think I've finally figured why my attitude towards choice is different to let's say "freedom of choice absolutists". I am a pragmatists. So basically for me if something in theory is a choice but in practice hardly ever then I don't consider it a free choice because it's not really free but dependent on various circumstances. And I think that's it when it comes to principle.

The examples we were discussing were somehow different so it does depend on case by case basis. I could lean in your favor in the case of valor for example due to mitigation of RNG. But while I wouldn't mind valor coming back I don't really miss it either.

Maybe we're arguing two different things here. At least with master loot a player gets to choose to agree to master loot. In regards to loot, PL-only doesn't give any other options. You can not determine for yourself what to do with that loot. It's soulbound. You either keep it or you vendor/DE it. If it's an upgrade you literally can't trade it if you wanted to. You are not allowed to choose to put the group ahead of yourself.

This depends on how Blizzard manages to sort gear scaling. It seems they are trying to more or less ensure that higher ilvl = upgrade. They cannot guarantee it 100% because it's simply difficult but if they do decent enough job in most cases we should be able to trade items that are not an upgrade for us.

As for the typical raider perspective not much is really changing when it comes to case of choice as before it was the officers that had the final say and not it's Blizzard. So either way someone other than the vast majority of playerbase. So this comes back to my point of view of real choice vs theoretical choice. At the end of the day extremes are never good but everything in between is a possible solution to any given problem.

[Cyranis]

Better for everyone, you'll get more loot that is useful.

Only by your narrow standards. There are a lot more people exposed to ML douche-bagery then just mythic raiders. This does not apply evenly to everyone in every situation. In fact, it probably only applies to a minuscule percentage. Overall the greater good is served by removing this choice from player hands. If there is no choice, there is no abuse.

After that its in the players hands, no guild can run without raiders and if ML is bad for the guild then there shouldn't be a guild. You accepted those rules when you joined the guild, much like you accepted that the GM is in control of the money the guild generates.

Classic accepted those rules bs. Accept our rules or leave. You accepted that blizz could change the rule of their game anytime it likes for any reason, in the EULA. They changed it, and you don't like it. So by your own argument. It's both your fault, and you should leave wow if you can't handle it.

There has been no determination of the cost being too high, infact there has been the exact opposite - determination that theres no reason to remove ML.

Since Blizzard is the authority in this matter, and it's very clear how they are moving forward. aka with the complete removal of ML. I think you are just spewing bs .. again. I know you weally want it to be true. But it just isn't.

The playerbase gaining anything from this change is a fraction of the playerbase the whole change affects negatively. So, if it falls into costs then it shouldn't be done.

Funny but ion in the Q&A said the exact opposite. Perhaps you should watch it. I think perhaps what you want to be true .. and what is true .. are all mixed up again.

"Trade the loot or be kicked", yeh its the same situation as with ML only this time you get that one piece of loot extra. It is already happening in pugs and its just gonna spread wider when Mythic loot (the loot that matters the most) is using that system.

No system is perfect. But the removal of ML makes it better. I don't see those guilds lasting very long. It will be a nice wake up call though.

[Shakou]

I'm good at math but you have difficulties with reading comprehension (or with general understanding). I said that PL grants more loot but not all loot is useful, with ML you could assign ~all loot so that its useful. ML provides less loot but you can utilize more of it making it better.

If masterloot doesn't make a big difference then, as I said earlier, people have no reason to use it as a reason to remove ML.

I'm quite capable of understanding that Blizzard is doing the change, doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it. Besides removing ML doesn't mean that players aren't going to "screw people" out of loot, as I've explained many times before.
Just like GCD change, people are discussing this even though Blizzard is implementing it but feel free to say your mantra to them as well - infact go and tell it to everyone that wants something to change.

No dude you suck at math and I am not reading your drivel anymore. It is not possible to get less useable loot while getting more loot, especially not in a master loot situation. In master loot you could very well get loot that nobody can use because it's not for their class/spec. With personal loot you will only ever get loot that drops in accordance with who is present in the raid and what their loot spec is.

BTW please cry more I think it's hilarious that you people are losing it over this.

[lummiuster]

lummiuster... What if they made Master Loot mythic-mode only?

Then it would mean that you cannot be in a competitive guild and run personal loot. Which is the reason why they are bringing forced PL. Man you really couldn't figure something that trivial?

[lappee]

Only by your narrow standards. There are a lot more people exposed to ML douche-bagery then just mythic raiders. This does not apply evenly to everyone in every situation. In fact, it probably only applies to a minuscule percentage. Overall the greater good is served by removing this choice from player hands. If there is no choice, there is no abuse.

Its just simple math, more useful loot is better.

I've already demonstrated how the "abuse" will stay even with PL, it just simply doesn't remove it.

Classic accepted those rules bs. Accept our rules or leave. You accepted that blizz could change the rule of their game anytime it likes for any reason, in the EULA. They changed it, and you don't like it. So by your own argument. It's both your fault, and you should leave wow if you can't handle it.

Its not BS, its how the world works. I will quit the game if I can't stand the changes, if I stayed despite not liking them then it indeed is my fault. However I know I can stand the changes, even if I dislike them. I can also discuss about them and show how changing removing ML won't solve anything for the better.

Since Blizzard is the authority in this matter, and it's very clear how they are moving forward. aka with the complete removal of ML. I think you are just spewing bs .. again. I know you weally want it to be true. But it just isn't.

It is clear how they're moving forward theres no question about it. However you claimed theres been determination of the costs of keeping ML being too high which is just false, we have heard a reason from Blizzard for doing it (Trials deserve loot) and we've demonstrated that the change is just gonna be worse for trials.

No determination of the costs being too high, just determination that there is no reason to remove it. It just doesn't fix anything.

Funny but ion in the Q&A said the exact opposite. Perhaps you should watch it. I think perhaps what you want to be true .. and what is true .. are all mixed up again.

The playerbase gaining from this = trials in guilds, some random members from guilds.
The playerbase affected by this change negatively = All guilds that use ML (minus trials and those few random members).
But yeah, you might want to watch the Q&A again and perhaps listen this time too!

No system is perfect. But the removal of ML makes it better. I don't see those guilds lasting very long. It will be a nice wake up call though.

No system is perfect because people are different. Removal of ML doesn't make anything better, as we've seen in this topic.
The guilds that abuse shouldn't last very long with ML, yet people claim those guilds exist all the time. So which is true or is it just that those people who find being "abused" just didn't deserve the loot because of multiple factors and the rest of the guild agreed on that. Maybe its just those people who "are in the wrong".
If you have some other explanation for the contradiction of statements I'd love to hear it.

[Deleted]

Why is everyone focusing on high end mythic guilds ?

They're far from being the only ones affected by this, and by far the ones which will be the most able to enforce other ways to optimize their loot distribution in a way that's comparable to what they were doing with ML, or even more egregious.

This change is simply removing options from EVERYONE, even if a lot of the playerbase wasn't using it, it's not reason enough to remove a functionality.
The ML abuse argument simply is a fallacy, it's only usable in guild groups, if you have a problem with ML just don't play with guilds that use ML ?
Nobody is taking anything from anyone who doesn't agree to use the system, and this change only removes a tool that might be the best one to use in a variety of situations for no real reason since it always was an optional tool to be used, and highly regulated already.

[lappee]

No dude you suck at math and I am not reading your drivel anymore. It is not possible to get less useable loot while getting more loot, especially not in a master loot situation. In master loot you could very well get loot that nobody can use because it's not for their class/spec. With personal loot you will only ever get loot that drops in accordance with who is present in the raid and what their loot spec is.

BTW please cry more I think it's hilarious that you people are losing it over this.

Lets make exaggerated example, just so its easier for you to crasp it.

With PL you get 10 loots, out of those loots only 2 are upgrades due to the rest having bad stats for the player that got them
ML gets 8 loots, out of those loots 7 are upgrades for a person in the raid.
7 is greater than 2, ML wins

Simple concept but clearly hard to crasp. I hope this helps your understanding.

[Leodric]

No dude you suck at math and I am not reading your drivel anymore. It is not possible to get less useable loot while getting more loot, especially not in a master loot situation. In master loot you could very well get loot that nobody can use because it's not for their class/spec. With personal loot you will only ever get loot that drops in accordance with who is present in the raid and what their loot spec is.

You don't seem to understand and I am trying to put up an example a grade schooler should understand:

I am in a raid as a MM Hunter. A shitty versa/crit ring drops for me, which is kinda bad and I don't want to use it. It has a higher item lvl but still it sucks 'cause my other secondary stats are way better.

Demonhunter in my guild get's a ring as well. It has mastery/haste which is shit for him. It has a higher item lvl but still it sucks 'cause his other secondary stats are way better.

With PL: Too bad, we both have to keep loot we won't actually use at all because our current rings are actually better. +0 usefull items
With ML: Same rings dropped, our loot council could have given the one ring to the Hunter and the other to the Demonhunter. +2 usefull items

It doesn't matter that PL gives more loot. You can't distribute it as effectively as with ML and therefore ML will give more usefull loot and the chance that loot is not usefull is therefore way lesser than with PL. Of course people who don't like to min/max and only want to have a higher gearscore don't give a damn about it. But any decent WoW player will look at the secondary stats and sim gear changes.

BTW please cry more I think it's hilarious that you people are losing it over this.

And you are doing what exactly right now?

- - - Updated - - -

Why is everyone focusing on high end mythic guilds ?

They're far from being the only ones affected by this, and by far the ones which will be the most able to enforce other ways to optimize their loot distribution in a way that's comparable to what they were doing with ML, or even more egregious.

This change is simply removing options from EVERYONE, even if a lot of the playerbase wasn't using it, it's not reason enough to remove a functionality.
The ML abuse argument simply is a fallacy, it's only usable in guild groups, if you have a problem with ML just don't play with guilds that use ML ?
Nobody is taking anything from anyone who doesn't agree to use the system, and this change only removes a tool that might be the best one to use in a variety of situations for no real reason since it always was an optional tool to be used, and highly regulated already.

100% if you don't like to play with ML, don't join a guild using it.

[Scrysis]

Seems you are not very good at math. More loot, is more loot. You don't get more useful loot when you get less loot. And you don't have any higher chance of getting useful loot with master loot than you do with personal. And this idea that master loot made any significant difference on progression outside of the absolute bleeding edge is pure hogwash, my buddies that just got Mythic Argus down with a world 537th kill a few weeks ago absolutely did not get there because they used master loot. In no way was that effective as long as they had been raiding Antorus they were well and beyond the required gear needed to down that boss. Same can be said of the most guilds that have killed it.

The rest of your drivel is just that...we don't have rules against say theft and murder because everyone is a thief or murderer or even just a potential one, but because the potential for those things to happen exists. What's so hard for you to understand that Blizzard decided that it just isn't okay for players to be able to screw people out of loot anymore? They don't have to justify their actions, they are not subject to you and your ideas about what's fair or what's not.

At any rate, you are totally wrong about Master Loot having every advantage over personal. One advantage of personal loot is if lots of people in your raid can loot spec for a specific piece of gear from a specific boss that just refuses to drop but that a few people really need, this is a tactic that would give personal loot a tremendous benefit over masterloot. While you're not guaranteed to get the item, the odds are more in your favor than they are with master loot. Also masterloot doesn't mean you're not stuck in a situation where you're basically disenchanting EVERYTHING, at least personal loot gives you a potential way out of it by simply giving you more loot to play around with and that loot dropping based on your loot spec.

The effectiveness of the drops is potentially a lot better though for raid ilevel using Master Loot. Notice how I said RAID ilevel, not personal ilevel. With Personal loot, you potentially lock items on players for whom it would be a A) trivial upgrade, B) side-grade, or even C) downgrade when it would be a massive upgrade for someone else.

Example! Player A has a really good trinket and player B has a really shitty trinket from last tier, and has bad luck. Player A gets the same really good trinket, but it warforges 5 ilevels higher. The new trinket is locked on Player A, so they can't give it to Player B, who could REALLY use it. Player A isn't a douchebag and KNOWS it's a much bigger upgrade for Player B and wants to give it over, but can't because personal loot rules have locked it.

A responsible Master Looter would fix situations like these and smooth out the RNG shinanegans. They'd be able to give the trinket to Player B and thus increase the raid ilevel as a whole by giving items to Players whose need is most dire first.

The slightly increased amount of items granted by PL (and yes, it is slight) won't have any real, long-term advantageous effect on the group as a whole after the first week or two of raiding a new tier since the items are dictated by RNG and potentially locked. I will acknowledge that there is some potential gains for the first couple of weeks of each new raid tier, especially since set bonuses are going away, but after the initial raids, it might actually be harder to fill in gaps in people's gear.

[Cyranis]

out of those loots only 2 are upgrades due to the rest having bad stats for the player that got them

You do know that on the beta right now, there are hardly any secondary stats on gear at all right? They very heavily weighted mainstat for this and other reasons. Tosses that argument right out the window.

[SirCowdog]

Yeah, the version that majority won't bother to deal with and minority won't have a steady and fast ilvl gain, i personally don't mind that, as long as you are not required to do them to be able to deal with some mythic bosses

But that's kind of the core of the entire argument. People don't have to do split runs NOW if they don't want to, or don't care about playing at that level. But people CAN if they choose to.

I suspect that some raid groups will still require that sort of thing in BfA. I don't think it's great; I'm mostly just pointing out that the change won't remove, or even significantly change the overall situation.

- - - Updated - - -

We don't know that yet since it's not been used on live but let's say mythic raisin collapses and all of the mythic raiders quit. Yay, 1% of the playerbase quits. Who cares?

They didn't really change flight back to what it was In MoP despite a FAR larger percentage of the playerbase disliking that. The fact is that serious mythic guilds (those who clear a tier on mythic before the next raid is released) are a tiny percentage of the players. They have no leverage - the random fluctuations of people leaving during summer, etc would swamp the ~1% of the playerbase that's into mythic in a serious manner.

I think you're underestimating the overall effect of mythic raiding.

It sets a higher goal for people to aspire to. What super-high-end hardcore Mythic raiders do at the top level is copied and emulated all the way down to the casual level. Take those people away and the game will keep going, for sure. But you'd have what amounts to a power vacuum that would be filled by lesser players who probably don't know what they're doing. It might also cause a cascading wave of other people quitting the game, with nothing higher up to aspire to.

Blizzard would also care, since they use Mythic raiding as a test-bed for their super-fine-tuning of raid encounters. They spend a fair amount of time setting those raids up, and would need to re-allocate that dev time somewhere else. I know we've talked about converting the raid system of 4 difficulties over to the M+ system of scaling. And honestly that might be the way to go in the future. Stop separating players by labels of difficulty. Cut down on the elitism a little.

All I was really pointing out is that trying to apply one overly simplistic tool to every situation is a bad approach. Even with flying(since you brought it up), many players expressed disgust with being forced onto the ground, and happiness when allowed to fly again. The fact that the game didn't break entirely doesn't mean that the way Blizzard went about it couldn't have been better! It's EXACTLY the same thing here with PL/ML.

It's not so much that PL is going to ruin the game. That's clearly not going to happen. It's just that they could be handling it better. MUCH better, IMO, than simply saying "Fuck you players, this is happening." Which is effectively what they're doing, all with typical Blizzard style of ignoring feedback.

- - - Updated - - -

The examples we were discussing were somehow different so it does depend on case by case basis. I could lean in your favor in the case of valor for example due to mitigation of RNG. But while I wouldn't mind valor coming back I don't really miss it either.

This is a point I just made with Clevin. It's not so much that these types of changes break the game. Obviously people will still be playing and getting loot. But each change takes away a little bit more of the player's ability to determine their own playstyle and approach. I look at the difference between WoW and something like Path op Exile, and I'm ASTOUNDED at the level of difference.

While you're limiting the scope of your critical assessment of WoW to only WoW over the years, it doesn't seem like a big deal when they change something like Valor Points, or PL/ML. Especially when Blizzard makes changes gradually, in small steps over the years. But when you take a step back, zoom out, and you start comparing it to what other games have been able to do, you begin to see just how limiting WoW has become. That's where I'm looking at this from: a greater context. Many of the people arguing in favor of this change are so close to the "problem" that they can't see anything else. They're only looking at the one time they got ripped off by a master looter and saying "this change is good!", without considering anything else.

This depends on how Blizzard manages to sort gear scaling. It seems they are trying to more or less ensure that higher ilvl = upgrade. They cannot guarantee it 100% because it's simply difficult but if they do decent enough job in most cases we should be able to trade items that are not an upgrade for us.

As for the typical raider perspective not much is really changing when it comes to case of choice as before it was the officers that had the final say and not it's Blizzard. So either way someone other than the vast majority of playerbase. So this comes back to my point of view of real choice vs theoretical choice. At the end of the day extremes are never good but everything in between is a possible solution to any given problem.

I made this point to another poster(which I'm not sorting through to find): If we follow Blizzard's line of logic of removing choices in order to prevent potentially abuse or problems, eventually all we end up with is a non-interactive movie that you're paying $15 a month for. We've just lost some of our ability to determine how we handle loot at the group level. There are ways around it, but it's going to be mitigated by not being able to trade direct iLVL upgrades.

What's next, then? We lose some of our ability to choose who we group with? We lose the ability to form guilds? Where does it stop?

[Lilija]

What's next, then? We lose some of our ability to choose who we group with? We lose the ability to form guilds? Where does it stop?

It stops when it doesn't sit with the real majority of the playerbase.

Also, you for your own reasons are not that happy with the direction Blizzard is taking with WoW. I, for my own reasons am very happy. And there is no right or wrong. No matter how we name those changes some people will like them, others not and most won't really care that much.

You are having this approach of Blizzard "cooking a frog" with WoW. But then again I don't really think they want to intentionally kill the game. And no one really knows where those changes are leading.

Many of the people arguing in favor of this change are so close to the "problem" that they can't see anything else. They're only looking at the one time they got ripped off by a master looter and saying "this change is good!", without considering anything else.

Except all of us are too close and don't know things apart from our own experience. How can you say that your assessment is any more accurate than any other player's? You don't have any other data except for your own experience.

[SirCowdog]

It stops when it doesn't sit with the real majority of the playerbase.

Also, you for your own reasons are not that happy with the direction Blizzard is taking with WoW. I, for my own reasons am very happy. And there is no right or wrong. No matter how we name those changes some people will like them, others not and most won't really care that much.

You are having this approach of Blizzard "cooking a frog" with WoW. But then again I don't really think they want to intentionally kill the game. And no one really knows where those changes are leading.

It's not that Blizzard is trying to "cook a frog"(I understood that reference) and destroy wow. But they are trying to maintain and even increase profits with a declining playerbase.

Except all of us are too close and don't know things apart from our own experience. How can you say that your assessment is any more accurate than any other player's? You don't have any other data except for your own experience.

I've been playing games for longer than most WoW players have existed. I have been playing WoW for just over 12 years. I went to school for game design. I have worked at a casino and studied it's rules, laws, structures, and philosophies. I've watched Blizzard's pattern of behavior change over the years.

That doesn't make me automatically right in any given situation. But it does make me more well-informed than some random poster who's evidence amounts to "I got screwed once by a person using ML. REMOVE IT!" or "Blizzard said it is good. So it MUST be good!"

And if new information presents itself, I'm going to consider it, and possibly change my point of view. From "my own experience", that's something almost no one on these forums does.

[KaPe]

This depends on how Blizzard manages to sort gear scaling. It seems they are trying to more or less ensure that higher ilvl = upgrade. They cannot guarantee it 100% because it's simply difficult but if they do decent enough job in most cases we should be able to trade items that are not an upgrade for us.

They would need to completely remove secondary stats to achieve this, because perfectly balancing them across all classes is completely impossible. Also, never create trinkets that aren't pure stat sticks, including +stat procs, because they can stack with various buffs to various degree. And then somehow make all Azerite traits be equally good across classes and scale perfectly with extra item levels... but then you get an item with traits you cannot even use because you didn't grind enough.

Their recent hotfix preventing "unintended" trading of higher ilvl items shows they will still pursue this goal, but it's hard to be optimistic with their track record. Well, unless they fired all of their item designers from Legion. Otherwise, there will still be crazy buffs to trinkets a week after new raid goes live, or "old items" being BiS for the entire expansion, because they cannot design anything good for (tanks, most likely).

And it still won't fix the issue of "this is +5ilvl for me, could have been +25 for the other guy. Sure it's technically an upgrade, but..."

I suppose the best part of it is getting rid of tier sets and the idiocy of PL giving class specific drops, so at least that part will be better. 'Course, I imagine they'll just invent something equally stupid and finally fix it in 8.3.

[Deleted]

Can't have both. If you want to be competitive in a race and everyone take steroids, then you are forced to take steroids if you want a chance of winning too. Very easy to understand.

Ml isnt steroids.
Ml is a tool that everyone can use - most are just too lazy to setup a good system for their guild OR think "its gonna get abused."

- - - Updated - - -

Why is everyone focusing on high end mythic guilds ?

They're far from being the only ones affected by this, and by far the ones which will be the most able to enforce other ways to optimize their loot distribution in a way that's comparable to what they were doing with ML, or even more egregious.

Yes mate totally unaffected cant wait to have trinkets drop on alts that cant trade it but wont be used anyway

Splits will still be a thing and sick items on alts you will never use will be insanely tilting

[Charge me Doctor]

But that's kind of the core of the entire argument. People don't have to do split runs NOW if they don't want to, or don't care about playing at that level. But people CAN if they choose to.

I suspect that some raid groups will still require that sort of thing in BfA. I don't think it's great; I'm mostly just pointing out that the change won't remove, or even significantly change the overall situation.

Well, and because they can do that we have disaster bosses like the Avatar.

[SirCowdog]

Well, and because they can do that we have disaster bosses like the Avatar.

And Blizzard is supposedly designing raids in BfA under the assumption of PL. I wonder if further bosses in later patches will recognize that a version of Split Runs are happening,or if we'll see Blizzard change how loot works.

Given their tendency to favor taking things away rather than a more nuanced response, I suspect we'll just see even heavier restrictions on how loot works.