Anyone who thinks they will balance Covenants is dreaming.

[Amerissis]

I don't, but I don't care. The difference will only be important to the professional endgame guilds who race for world first. The difference for everyone else is so small, there is more to win from just getting better at your rotation than from changing your covenant for every boss.

[A Chozo]

The whole system hinges on them balancing them.

For real, it doesn't. Not in the sense that the community expects.

For Blizzard (and most companies) stuff is balanced when all available stuff is viable and performs similarly. The thing is that sometimes one thing is useful in one situation and other stuff is useful in other situations.

The community - as in, a bunch of tryhards that keep shitposting in the forums - expect every Covenant choice to provide the same DPS increase against Patchwerk and M+ trash, which of course won't happen. But it will still be balanced, because all of those choices will be viable to defeat Mythic Denathrius. That's what is seen as "balanced" by Blizzard - and for any of those devs it's irrelevant to pursue more balance, because it would hurt the design, the tryhards would still be unsatisfied, and they already pre-ordered the game, so why bother?

[Rayzen17]

Who care if they balance them. Games are meant to be fun. Not Spreadsheets.

Players who actually do more than casual stuff like want them to be balanced.
If you don't care either way, then what's the problem?

Does it even make a difference if you don't pick a covenant in regards to your character power needs?

[deenman]

Who care if they balance them. Games are meant to be fun. Not Spreadsheets.

considering people have done the math here,and some covenant choices lead to 40-50% more power,i think people will find it very NOT fun being half a player,and this will affect EVERYONE,because first off it trickles down,we have seen this everytime! and also,by doing this,blizz has to tune encounters around it,so....say hello to naxx 80 or emerald nightmare kiddie level difficulty raiding

[VinceVega]

considering people have done the math here,and some covenant choices lead to 40-50% more power,i think people will find it very NOT fun being half a player,and this will affect EVERYONE,because first off it trickles down,we have seen this everytime! and also,by doing this,blizz has to tune encounters around it,so....say hello to naxx 80 or emerald nightmare kiddie level difficulty raiding

I Raid Mythic and i like it BUT this is not DarkSouls. You don't have to have incredibly hard encounters in this game like KilJaeden and such. I coul dbe tuned in a way that more people even attempt to raid again as many just don't dare.

[deenman]

I Raid Mythic and i like it BUT this is not DarkSouls. You don't have to have incredibly hard encounters in this game like KilJaeden and such. I coul dbe tuned in a way that more people even attempt to raid again as many just don't dare.

you also dont need to do kj mythic if you dont want,thats why normal and hc exist,this isnt tbc anymore....also kj was fine after the fixes and some of the nerfs,helya was proly perfect balance

[Rayzen17]

I Raid Mythic and i like it BUT this is not DarkSouls. You don't have to have incredibly hard encounters in this game like KilJaeden and such. I coul dbe tuned in a way that more people even attempt to raid again as many just don't dare.

The problem is that if Blizzard balances taking into consideration that players might pick under performing Covenants, then that means that a raid team which picks the best Covenants for the fight will have it much easier.

[exochaft]

You can't "Balance" two abilities that do different things. It has nothing to do with the damage they do. An AoE ability cannot be balanced against a ST ability because how good one does depends entirely on the situation.

That said, I like there being an irreversible choice in the game. Making such hard decisions is fun and immersive for me.

It comes down to what balance means, and when I tend to harp on Blizz for balancing issues... it's probably a lot different than what most people probably think I mean.

First step is defining what balance means, everyone has a different idea. For example, the person you quoted stated their idea of balance when it came to class abilities was that they do the same damage. It's rather akin to a popular view that to balance classes they all have to have the same damage output and potential, which not only would be nigh impossible to do... I don't think that's balanced (and neither do the devs, I'm fairly certain).

I'll stick to abilities available to a class across the covenants as an example to keep it simplified. According to the person you quoted, they define balanced as the abilities all doing the same damage. As you stated, the abilities do different things in different, and if they all had the same damage that doesn't mean they're necessarily balanced. Taking it a step further, knowing that each of the abilities will do different things and have different results in varying scenarios, how would one define the system as balanced?

Let's say that one ability is ST, one is AoE, one is cleave, and one is utility/movement. Four abilities that do four different things. How can you balance this? In most of my posts, I tend to reference that Blizz either has to nerf them into uselessness or make them strong in niche scenarios. To expand upon this example, each of these abilities should shine in scenarios that fit the ability and less so in other areas (the ST ability shines in ST compared to all the others, the AoE ability in AoE scenarios, etc.). Even if you want to assign DPS numbers to the abilities, even the utility/movement ability has DPS gains, although that can be hard to quantify exactly... but in the case of many casters, except BM hunters, unassisted movement is a large DPS loss, and having abilities to speed up or make you able to get back to DPSing faster are a DPS gain. So in the end, all the abilities have different DPS values of some kind, but the system as a whole is balanced to where the abilities shine above the others when you get the right scenario.

So where do I think Blizz gets this wrong? Typically, when Blizz heavily favors certain scenarios or making abilities/specs/classes/etc. universally good at everything. If there are no trade-offs or downsides to making a choice, then Blizz has failed at making a meaningful choice. This can either come down to the ability/class design for the game content design and systems themselves. When I view things like the covenant signature abilities, the reason I'm skeptical concerning balance isn't because they all do different things (I actually like that!), it's that one or two are almost universally better in every scenario considering how Blizz tends to balance and design content. Now they're trying to shift the balance of power to other systems, but as of late Blizz tends to cling stubbornly to certain ideas when it may just be easier to scrap it or come at it from a different angle. Basically, my concern isn't that all the abilities won't have niche applications, it's that a handful of outliers (in the sense of almost or always better than everything else in every scenario) won't be addressed. If Blizz can allow all these new abilities to shine at certain moments while being inferior to others at some point, that's probably as balanced as we can hope to get.

[Tronski]

From the conduit poll, here are the results: 1019 votes

Question: Should Conduits have a week timer, lower or none for changing them?

A) One week cooldown is fine ==> 34.9%
B) Less than a week would be fine. ==> 12.6%
C) Changing without a cooldown would be fine. ==> 52.5%

As you can see, the results show that the majority are against constraints such as these.
I'm willing to bet another poll for Covenants would bring about similar numbers.

People may think that 1019 votes, doesn't tell much, but it's a good sample (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sample) for what the playerbase is like.
As such, this doesn't look good for Ion if more than half don't like the new systems restrictions.

What players want is rarely a good measure for how a game should look. WoD included everything players ever asked for, yet those same people still managed to say it was worse than Cata because they gad to wait between raids.

I want every mount, pet and toy for free, and free consumables and enchants so I can raidlog forever and ever. Everyone would have voted yes in that poll.

Guess how that game would look.

[Super Kami Dende]

considering people have done the math here,and some covenant choices lead to 40-50% more power,i think people will find it very NOT fun being half a player,and this will affect EVERYONE,because first off it trickles down,we have seen this everytime! and also,by doing this,blizz has to tune encounters around it,so....say hello to naxx 80 or emerald nightmare kiddie level difficulty raiding

TBF most People that think Covenants matter enough are kiddie level raiders anyway.

[deenman]

TBF most People that think Covenants matter enough are kiddie level raiders anyway.

yeah being 50% weaker than other players of the same spec is gonna be a non issue with zero repercussions

[Tronski]

The problem is that if Blizzard balances taking into consideration that players might pick under performing Covenants, then that means that a raid team which picks the best Covenants for the fight will have it much easier.

You can't both say that only hardcore raiders care and that they should balance the raids around what the hardcore people picks.

That would just hurt the casuals even more as they rarely has the same level of gear and skill as the hardcores.

[LordVargK]

From the conduit poll, here are the results: 1019 votes

Question: Should Conduits have a week timer, lower or none for changing them?

A) One week cooldown is fine ==> 34.9%
B) Less than a week would be fine. ==> 12.6%
C) Changing without a cooldown would be fine. ==> 52.5%

As you can see, the results show that the majority are against constraints such as these.
I'm willing to bet another poll for Covenants would bring about similar numbers.

People may think that 1019 votes, doesn't tell much, but it's a good sample (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sample) for what the playerbase is like.
As such, this doesn't look good for Ion if more than half don't like the new systems restrictions.

It's not a good sample though, since forum users (and here especially those who are railed up against the conduit system) are not a representative part of all WoW players. Also the question is misleading and should have allowed multiple answers. One could be fine with a 1 week cooldown and still be fine with changing without cooldown, but this opinion is not represented here.

Also you don't even know if the people that have taken part in the survey even know how the conduit system works, making their vote worthless.

I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself

That said, while conduits look pretty balanced to me, the covenant abilities don't. And they can't be balanced kinda by design, so yeah it's take performance over flavour or the other way around.

[facefist]

I prefer them not balancing it. Just make one clearly better and let me have it throughout the whole expansion. If someone picks one that is obviously not the best then that's on him and he can deal with the meaningful choice.

[SirBeef]

I don't, but I don't care. The difference will only be important to the professional endgame guilds who race for world first. The difference for everyone else is so small, there is more to win from just getting better at your rotation than from changing your covenant for every boss.

Don't forget those that aren't even close but think it matters.

[Rayzen17]

What players want is rarely a good measure for how a game should look. WoD included everything players ever asked for, yet those same people still managed to say it was worse than Cata because they gad to wait between raids.

I want every mount, pet and toy for free, and free consumables and enchants so I can raidlog forever and ever. Everyone would have voted yes in that poll.

Guess how that game would look.

That's reaching it and you know it.
How about this then, we let Blizzard shove everything they want in a game and never give feedback.
Would you like this game?

How many times did they introduce stupid mechanics/systems that the players didn't like, they complained and it got changed?
Yeah.. that's what i thought.

- - - Updated - - -

You can't both say that only hardcore raiders care and that they should balance the raids around what the hardcore people picks.

That would just hurt the casuals even more as they rarely has the same level of gear and skill as the hardcores.

That's why there are multiple layers of difficulty, for everyone:
LFR, Normal raids, Heroic raids, Mythic raids
Normal dungeons, Heroic dungeons, Mythic dungeons and M+ dungeons
PVP has multiple as well, normal battlegrounds, rated battlegrounds with different ratings involved, as well as ofc arenas with mmr.

Casuals already can try out for whatever they want, their cap is the performance they dish out, as such they can try out anything they want, pertaining that they start from the bottom like every other player started out and go up from there.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not a good sample though, since forum users (and here especially those who are railed up against the conduit system) are not a representative part of all WoW players. Also the question is misleading and should have allowed multiple answers. One could be fine with a 1 week cooldown and still be fine with changing without cooldown, but this opinion is not represented here.

Also you don't even know if the people that have taken part in the survey even know how the conduit system works, making their vote worthless.



That said, while conduits look pretty balanced to me, the covenant abilities don't. And they can't be balanced kinda by design, so yeah it's take performance over flavour or the other way around.

The questions are not misleading, they are case and point.
What you gave an example of is an apathetic decision.
When multiple people argue about what color should a fence be colored: Red or Blue. Of course you will ask everyone, they will either side red or blue, or they can say they don't care, as per your example. Guess what, the guy who said he doesn't care isn't going to lead to a decision, since the fence is going to be colored red or blue, you either give an answer or you don't matter. So it's the same as voting irl.

The poll isn't an end all be all indicator, but it is an indicator nonetheless. Maybe do a google search to see how samples matter.

[VinceVega]

you also dont need to do kj mythic if you dont want,thats why normal and hc exist,this isnt tbc anymore....also kj was fine after the fixes and some of the nerfs,helya was proly perfect balance

You don't have to, that is right. But it should be achivable for more than just 0,1% of players. That is overkill.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is that if Blizzard balances taking into consideration that players might pick under performing Covenants, then that means that a raid team which picks the best Covenants for the fight will have it much easier.

Yes. And if you think you need that edge you have to take it.
Don't get me wrong i would like to switch the abilities like normal ones (not covenants themselve, just the ability) but i also don't think it will have an effect on most of the players anyway. I never asked someone whch way he is skilled before inviting him into a Mythic+ for example-

[dewd]

ill bite. of course they will at least try to balance, they are just going to make so adjustments so small in so time intervals so big that by 9.3 it will be kinda acceptable. just like bfa. still shit but acceptable.

[Rayzen17]

You don't have to, that is right. But it should be achivable for more than just 0,1% of players. That is overkill.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes. And if you think you need that edge you have to take it.
Don't get me wrong i would like to switch the abilities like normal ones (not covenants themselve, just the ability) but i also don't think it will have an effect on most of the players anyway. I never asked someone whch way he is skilled before inviting him into a Mythic+ for example-

There are only these possibilities:

1) The covenants are locked
a) Player that doesn't care to switch >>> gets what he wants
b) Player that cares to switch >>> doesn't get what he wants

2) The covenants are unlocked
a) Player that doesn't care to switch >>> gets what he wants
b) Player that cares to switch >>> gets what he wants

As can be clearly seen, the best design is for the covenants to be unlocked.
If someone doesn't care or doesn't want to switch they have that option even if the covenants are unlocked, the same can't be said for the covenants being locked design for players that care to switch.

[goldlock]

There are only these possibilities:

1) The covenants are locked
a) Player that doesn't care to switch >>> gets what he wants
b) Player that cares to switch >>> doesn't get what he wants

2) The covenants are unlocked
a) Player that doesn't care to switch >>> gets what he wants
b) Player that cares to switch >>> gets what he wants

As can be clearly seen, the best design is for the covenants to be unlocked.
If someone doesn't care or doesn't want to switch they have that option even if the covenants are unlocked, the same can't be said for the covenants being locked design for players that care to switch.

They are chasing a weird and impossible dream... they want players to be unique like they were back with tiers and when high end raiding gear was sought after but they don't want to actually make gear like that again.

So you get this weird convoluted system that looks prime to self destruct. I know most mythic players are placing bets on what covenants will get nerfed after launch. So far the stand out are the bats for pve and necolords for pvp.