"No changes/QOL" = in denial.

[Gratlim]

It's Classic, not Classic Refined. No changes, bitch. And I say that as a Feral/Cat Druid.

/thread.

Yeah same also as feral kitty. It's not even that bad on the metter. Close back rogues. Just a couple of items, powershift shred mortal bite rotation et voila: good dps.

On a side note the best class in the game in Classic is an hybrid (spoiler alert: technically warrior is hybrid).

[IIamaKing]

I like classes being different, I like that there is a hybrid tax. Jack of all trades, master of none.

[Estravolt]

It's Classic, not Classic Refined. No changes, bitch. And I say that as a Feral/Cat Druid.

/thread.

But it is refined classic already

- - - Updated - - -

I like classes being different, I like that there is a hybrid tax. Jack of all trades, master of none.

Paladin tho.

[schwarzkopf]

QoL = quality of the player, not the character.

Anything that changes game play (e.g. stacking Warlock shards, or AoE looting) isn't about QoL it is game changing.

[zhero]

= Acting as if no one ever wanted changes back in 2004/05. Acting as if it were acceptable for Blizzard to leave hybrid classes incredibly weak compared to pures/semi-pures.

No, hybrid classes being weaker in their current state is *not* good game design - not in any reasonable way. They waited an entire Xpac to bring them up to a reasonable standard. That sucks. As long as a change is done "in the spirit of Vanilla" (to burrow a phrase from the Catholic Church) then it shouldn't be controversial. And yeah, I acknowledge that Blizzard aren't Jagex in terms of their skills at communicating with the needs/wants of their player-base. I understand if someone is worried about any potential QOL changes.

RSC is one of the most successful MMO's of all time, and it's a reboot of past game version. They have still made changes, "in the spirit of 2007". This utopia nonsense over no-change has got to stop, because trust me when I say this: Classic will not maintain its current level of popularity if it doesn't.

Want the vanilla experience replicated as much as possible in Classic? Accept calls for QoL changes.

(At any rate, what do you even want? To keep playing classic as it is right now for years? Lol)

just because people asked for changes back then doesn't mean anything should be changed.

[BananaHandsB]

But it is refined classic already
Paladin tho.

The whole slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. Just because it isn't exactly the same, doesn't mean we should just start making changes willy nilly. Sure, some things just aren't possible to replicate exactly, that's just reality, but the things being discussed here do not even remotely fall into that category.

[MoanaLisa]

The whole slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. Just because it isn't exactly the same, doesn't mean we should just start making changes willy nilly. Sure, some things just aren't possible to replicate exactly, that's just reality, but the things being discussed here do not even remotely fall into that category.

Exactly this. The intention of the developers was to deliver something that is as close to Vanilla as possible. The intention was never to change things to the point that Classic would be completely different but played in the same zones, dungeons and raids.

Class balance changes would have wide-ranging effects that would create essentially a different game. The key word is intention.

[Kaleredar]

I thought people were aware of this?

They wanted all the bad, imbalanced design aspects that made it so you could invest 50+ hours into a worthless class/spec combo.

And you got it.

[jellmoo]

Okay. Imagine the decision was made to make Ret Paladins competitive DPS. What's the solution? Is it purely numerical? Do we up values so that the numbers they put out are in line with say what a Rogue can do? Or are altering mechanics? Do we change the Seal/Judge system? Do we change thew effects of Blessings? Do we add in additional abilities to make gameplay more dynamic? How large and sweeping are these changes?

Now, how do we compensate for the improvement? How do alter thew balance of the game to accommodate for it? Are Rogues now useless and no longer wanted? Is the game now too easy as Ret Paladins can stomp through content unchallenged?

Part of the problem isn't just people screaming "Classic means classic! No changes!". There are very real repercussions to making changes to the game, the least of which is that one change will inevitably lead to another. And even done with the best of intentions, it could lead to a game that is very well and truly different than what Classic was meant to be.

[Azerate]

= Acting as if no one ever wanted changes back in 2004/05. Acting as if it were acceptable for Blizzard to leave hybrid classes incredibly weak compared to pures/semi-pures.

No, hybrid classes being weaker in their current state is *not* good game design - not in any reasonable way. They waited an entire Xpac to bring them up to a reasonable standard. That sucks. As long as a change is done "in the spirit of Vanilla" (to burrow a phrase from the Catholic Church) then it shouldn't be controversial. And yeah, I acknowledge that Blizzard aren't Jagex in terms of their skills at communicating with the needs/wants of their player-base. I understand if someone is worried about any potential QOL changes.

RSC is one of the most successful MMO's of all time, and it's a reboot of past game version. They have still made changes, "in the spirit of 2007". This utopia nonsense over no-change has got to stop, because trust me when I say this: Classic will not maintain its current level of popularity if it doesn't.

Want the vanilla experience replicated as much as possible in Classic? Accept calls for QoL changes.

(At any rate, what do you even want? To keep playing classic as it is right now for years? Lol)

OSRS is not a re-release of RSC, but of RS2.

Also, Runescape's situation is really nothing like that of WoW. People keep comparing the two, but the changes made to RS2 were far more drastic than everything that happened between vanilla and bfa in WoW.

Back to Classic...it's really a question of what we want it to be. Some people just want that Vanilla experience forever, others want to build upon that foundation, but in a different direction. Up to Blizzard to judge whether the latter will have a large enough audience to be profitable and worth spending development time on. My opinion is that it's not. Once again, it works in Runescape because a lot of people just wanted the game to continue being updated with the old combat system...that's what they got in the form of OSRS. In WoW, most of the things that people have issues with are, let's face it, QoL changes that went too far, in their opinion.

[Canield]

Thing is we wanted those changes. We got those changes. And at some point we decided those changes were not for all of us. That is why we wished to go back. That is ultimately why Classic was redeveloped.

My ultimate hope is that every expansion gets it's own place.

[gaymer77]

= Acting as if no one ever wanted changes back in 2004/05. Acting as if it were acceptable for Blizzard to leave hybrid classes incredibly weak compared to pures/semi-pures.

No, hybrid classes being weaker in their current state is *not* good game design - not in any reasonable way. They waited an entire Xpac to bring them up to a reasonable standard. That sucks. As long as a change is done "in the spirit of Vanilla" (to burrow a phrase from the Catholic Church) then it shouldn't be controversial. And yeah, I acknowledge that Blizzard aren't Jagex in terms of their skills at communicating with the needs/wants of their player-base. I understand if someone is worried about any potential QOL changes.

RSC is one of the most successful MMO's of all time, and it's a reboot of past game version. They have still made changes, "in the spirit of 2007". This utopia nonsense over no-change has got to stop, because trust me when I say this: Classic will not maintain its current level of popularity if it doesn't.

Want the vanilla experience replicated as much as possible in Classic? Accept calls for QoL changes.

(At any rate, what do you even want? To keep playing classic as it is right now for years? Lol)

Fine I'll support this "Classic revised" bullshit you want to have where hybrids put out the same heal/tanking/dps as the pure roles do. Only condition I have is every druid besides resto loses every healing spell, rebirth, and innervate. Every non-healing shaman loses ALL of their healing spells or mana totem. Every paladin loses their healing spells, BOP, DI, and anything considered "healing" that isn't holy. Every druid that isn't feral loses bear & cat forms. Every shadow priest loses their healing spells.

Man does that sound awesome or what? All those reasons to bring a hybrid to your raid are gone so the hybrids can focus on their non-healing duty now!!!!

And btw, what exactly is a "semi-pure"? Isn't that what a hybrid is?

[Doctor Funkenstein]

If bringing a hybrid class to a raid in a dps role (yes im aware there are a few exceptions like feral druids) was actually worth it, this argument might have a leg to stand on. But still, if you want actual viable hybrid dps classes, wait for tbc servers. Im sure they'll come eventually.

It's not my fault you play with shitty human beings, and it certainly isn't the game's.

[Druidzorz]

Classic is not good game design. You're going to like it the wasy they have it because blizzard knows you better than you know yourself.

[anon5123]

I like having no changes to class balance because you look at what happens in retail with so many class balance changes, one patch you are good, next patch you get nerfed to shit and are forced to play a different class/spec if you want to remain competitive.

1.12 class design is not "balanced", it goes for a more rock-paper-scissors approach in PvP, and a more "every class has its niche" in PvE. The classes are unbalanced but that's what makes the game fun to play, because every class is special in its own way, and has its own strengths and weaknesses. You can start a new character right now, and know full well exactly what type of gameplay awaits you at max level.

Want the vanilla experience replicated as much as possible in Classic? Accept calls for QoL changes.

I'm not playing for "MUH VUHNILUH EXPERIENZZ" or whatever other emotion-based argument you're putting out.

I'm playing because I like the game.

(At any rate, what do you even want? To keep playing classic as it is right now for years? Lol)

Why does the game HAVE to change?

I can go back and play Megaman X on Super Nintendo right now and it will be just as fun as it was 25 years ago when it first released.

I don't understand this mindset that "ohhh the game HAS to have new content and changes or else nobody will want to play it anymore!"...it's just ridiculous to even consider. Even more ridiculous when you consider that vanilla private servers have been a thing since 2007/2008 and yet, here we are, 10 years later, still having a large playerbase enjoying the game.

[Heartbreaker]

Of course people demanded changes in 2004/5 - and got them with TBC. But Classic was supposed to bring the 1.x content, not TBC. Have patience, TBC will come soon enough and Hybrids will be viable.

Personally, i am glad they did not start with TBC, as the introduction of Belves into the Horde caused a wound to the soul of the game that has not even begun to heal 15 years later and will do even worse damage when TBC relaunches.

As for simply applying TBC talents+skills to the 1.x content....that would not work. It would require a complete retuning of everything + introduction of new gear. it would no longer be 1.x. Not even remotely.

It just shows the futility of the whole endeavor. The game has many flaws, and people notice them while playing, and the natural response is to want them fixed. Like it was the case back then, naturally. But nothing is supposed to get fixed, so people are stuck with a broken game.

[anon5123]

But nothing is supposed to get fixed, so people are stuck with a broken game.

I enjoy the game BECAUSE it is "broken" like this. I enjoy the game despite its flaws, because the flaws do not outweigh the positives. Would it be nice to have some of the more annoying things fixed? Sure, but that just opens the floodgates for more and more potential changes, and we're left with something that is not 1.12 in the slightest.

Vanilla has flaws, yes, but it is not a """""""""broken game""""""""""" in the slightest.

You want a "broken game" ? Go look at old Ragnarok Online, where class balance is literally nonexistent, and the only gameplay is endlessly grinding mobs to level up, or broken unbalanced PvP.

[Heartbreaker]

I enjoy the game BECAUSE it is "broken" like this. I enjoy the game despite its flaws

Direct contradiction. First you say you enjoy the game because it's broken and then you say you enjoy it despite its flaws. Pick one.

[Skorpionss]

I agree they should add some changes, like 2-3 years after P6 releases maybe.

[anon5123]

Direct contradiction. First you say you enjoy the game because it's broken and then you say you enjoy it despite its flaws. Pick one.

...those statements are the same thing

"""""""""direct contradiction"""""""""""" ?

Also thanks for taking 1 sentence out of context and ignoring the entire rest of my post, rofl