My sentiment on Covenants and why i might get dissapointed

[Yvern]

I would like to discuss the ''new'' covenant system thats coming soon to us in the new Shadowlands expansion.
As a player i like to play my character to the best of my knowledge and i enjoy getting as strong as possible.

While reading guides about the covenants for mages i have come to the conclusion that the only viable option for PvE are the ''Kyrians''.
I made this conclusion from reading a mage class post for shadowlands from ''Preheat'' a fire mage player:
Iam not allowed to link yet its called: ''Fire Mage State on Shadowlands Alpha - Spell Changes, Covenant Abilities, and Combustion''

Now let me state why iam worried and what i would like to know: Iam worried i won't have a choice in choosing which covenant i will be able to play. While i was looking forward to play maldraxxus i will choose Kyrian if this is the only viable PvE option, because i enjoy optimalisation. It seems iam at a crossroads. How do you guys feel about this and the balance around covenant?

Ps: i will only have time for 1 character (my main) in shadowlands, people with alts have more options in experiencing all the covenants.

[Mysterymask]

hello welcome to MMO Champion

You are looking for Livejournal a quick google search will find that for you

[Yvern]

Iam sorry could you eloborate, this doesnt seem to contribute to the questions iam asking. I dont need another social platform about blogs?

[Bloodyleech]

If you only choose depending on optimization it can't be that important for you if another cov is better suited for your own style.
There is no "use this cov or you can't pve // this or that is not viable". Maybe at the very top, like top 0,1%/world #1 runner, but not anything below this.

Either you want to experience maldraxxus or not. You have to make the cut - squish the very last dps out of your character or don't and experience stuff you actually want to.

[Yvern]

If you only choose depending on optimization it can't be that important for you if another cov is better suited for your own style.
There is no "use this cov or you can't pve // this or that is not viable". Maybe at the very top, like top 0,1%/world #1 runner, but not anything below this.

Either you want to experience maldraxxus or not. You have to make the cut - squish the very last dps out of your character or don't and experience stuff you actually want to.

You do have a very valid point, but wouldn't it be amazing if all the covenants had an viable option for PvE in some form or way? Iam not even only talking about DPS, but things like mobility or utility would be nice too. Maldraxxus has an damage component too that is right now just much weaker.

[Bloodyleech]

You do have a very valid point, but wouldn't it be amazing if all the covenants had an viable option for PvE in some form or way? Iam not even only talking about DPS, but things like mobility or utility would be nice too. Maldraxxus has an damage component too that is right now just much weaker.

It isn't possible for blizzard to make them all even because they all work very different - the same way as classes can't be balanced.
They are all viable, but not for every class or spec.

Whatever anyone says - as long as these are working different and dont have the very same abilities (just looking different) + no class abilities, it can't be balanced.

[Bloodyleech]

How do people feel? It is already being called the worst system and worst x-pac

Have fun with https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...ts-is-dreaming and many other threads to come once SL goes live.

I don't even know why Kyrian is the optimal PvE solution when people keep telling me that you need to be Venthyr for the teleport.

And ofc you have a choice. You even have 4 choices..and you chose Kyrian (also you can switch)

Venthyr teleport has been nerfed as far as I know (now casting time without souldbind / no 2 charges with soulbind ; correct me if wrong).
Right now there are many debuffs, espescially bleeds, which can all be cleansed with the Kyrian ability.

You can not switch around as much as you want (like boss/dungeon 1 kyrian, boss/dungeon 2 venthyr).

[CalamityHeart]

As a player i like to play my character to the best of my knowledge and i enjoy getting as strong as possible.

This attitude is respectable.

Iam worried i won't have a choice in choosing which covenant i will be able to play.

This attitude is... less respectable.

It's fine to want your character to be the best version of itself, and it's equally fine to want to experience an aesthetic or ability that you personally enjoy or are curious about trying. When those two desires are over in different covenants, then it gets tough, but you do have a choice. There is a brain inside your head, my guy.

The beauty of being able to create multiple characters is that with enough time, you can eventually end up doing both. But if what you say is true, my personal opinion is that doing what makes you happy > doing what makes you stronger, if you only have time for one or the other to really matter in the end.

[ecospherez]

Firm believer in this sort of thing only matters to the top 1%

Just pick whichever you want, you'll be able to clear everything in the game if you're a decent player regardless of which you choose.

[Gaidax]

You do have a very valid point, but wouldn't it be amazing if all the covenants had an viable option for PvE in some form or way? Iam not even only talking about DPS, but things like mobility or utility would be nice too. Maldraxxus has an damage component too that is right now just much weaker.

First of all nothing is tuned yet, you can expect pretty big changes until raid release.

Secondly, yes - there will be the "go to" covenant for X. Frankly it's just like a spec - you always have a top dog spec and talent choice for every type of content and if you are so laser focused on performance you will take that anyway, so frankly it's a moot point. It's like people sitting as Fire whole 8.3 and not touching Frost with a 10 feet pole and then you have a bit of those who do Arcane.

So yeah, if, let's say - Night Fae Frost becomes the new 8.3 Fire, you will have everyone and their mother play it in high end, but it's the usual FOTM - covenants or not - you always have.

As such, I don't see much reason to sweat there. Instead of, Fire Mage OP WTF, it will be Kyrian Fire Mage OP WTF, which effectively is little difference there anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Firm believer in this sort of thing only matters to the top 1%

Just pick whichever you want, you'll be able to clear everything in the game if you're a decent player regardless of which you choose.

This is the healthy way to look on these things. I see people who are totally don't have a horse in this race tryharding shit for god knows what reason and only end up being salty, despite this not being a thing in their level - 90% of the players are simply not in the place where such things truly matter.

So if that's the case, why have all this anxiety over this? If someone wants to go FOTM top performance, he'd do that anyway as usual, for others - whatever.

[Yvern]

This attitude is respectable.



This attitude is... less respectable.

It's fine to want your character to be the best version of itself, and it's equally fine to want to experience an aesthetic or ability that you personally enjoy or are curious about trying. When those two desires are over in different covenants, then it gets tough, but you do have a choice. There is a brain inside your head, my guy.

The beauty of being able to create multiple characters is that with enough time, you can eventually end up doing both. But if what you say is true, my personal opinion is that doing what makes you happy > doing what makes you stronger, if you only have time for one or the other to really matter in the end.

I like your train of thoughts here, and it seems that choosing an covenant won't be as impactful on my PvE performance then i thought it would be. While i agree that playing the covenant u think is the most fun is the viable option, i would still be very bummed out if they did tuning after i choose the kyrian covenant. Because that might mean i suddenly have an penalty to pick the other covenant thats buffed by blizz (in dps , utility or whatever, just amazing for PvE suddenly). so that boils back to my question i would love more covenants to have an viable fun choice for pve.

- - - Updated - - -

Firm believer in this sort of thing only matters to the top 1%

Just pick whichever you want, you'll be able to clear everything in the game if you're a decent player regardless of which you choose.

I guess i have to agree with you for sure, but only IF the covenant abilities will be a 1 % top player thingy. They might become essential if they dont get carefully balanced. For example Fire mage in BFA had some disturbingly OP ''borrowed power'' in the form of a broken trinket and other stuff.

[Bloodyleech]

I like your train of thoughts here, and it seems that choosing an covenant won't be as impactful on my PvE performance then i thought it would be. While i agree that playing the covenant u think is the most fun is the viable option, i would still be very bummed out if they did tuning after i choose the kyrian covenant. Because that might mean i suddenly have an penalty to pick the other covenant thats buffed by blizz (in dps , utility or whatever, just amazing for PvE suddenly). so that boils back to my question i would love more covenants to have an viable fun choice for pve.

Blizz will nerf and buff covs the whole expansion. If one wants to really be #1 dps, he will have to switch multiple times. It's just stupidly hard to balance them all on an even level, if not even impossible to do so. The generell all-player abilities are kinda easy to balance evenly, but because every class got a unique ability ... no, I don't think this is something anyone could do.

[Rayzen17]

This attitude is respectable.



This attitude is... less respectable.

It's fine to want your character to be the best version of itself, and it's equally fine to want to experience an aesthetic or ability that you personally enjoy or are curious about trying. When those two desires are over in different covenants, then it gets tough, but you do have a choice. There is a brain inside your head, my guy.

The beauty of being able to create multiple characters is that with enough time, you can eventually end up doing both. But if what you say is true, my personal opinion is that doing what makes you happy > doing what makes you stronger, if you only have time for one or the other to really matter in the end.

Or Blizzard can facilitate to answer both his(and many others) needs? Increasing his enjoyment in the game.
Uncouple Covenant abilities and soulbinds from the Covenants themselves, where you have the Covenant zone and its facilities for transportation, dailies, transmogs, mounts, pets, etc.... look, it's fixed now.

- - - Updated - - -

Firm believer in this sort of thing only matters to the top 1%

Just pick whichever you want, you'll be able to clear everything in the game if you're a decent player regardless of which you choose.

I want to pick Night Fae for raiding from 9 to 11, 3 days a week.
I want to pick Venthyr for M+ which I can do any day i want.
I want to pick Necrolord for PVP arenas, because they have bomb ass stuff for PVP and i want to do it any time i please.
I want Night Fae again with different conduits for dailies/world questing.
I want to see what the buzz is about Kirians when i have time.
This is what a normal day of wow looks like, just chose 3-4 of the stuff above, this is what a player who does multiple types of content wants from the game. So stop with the stupid saying about "clearing" the game, that's not an end all be all goal. I'm sorry that you do random quests and rp in Goldshire so you have zero clues about what people enjoy in the game.

Yes man, picking only 1 is sooo much fun. Being locked into 1 will increase the fun i have in the game.

This business about the top 1% is the biggest bullshit i have ever seen. Especially since it was proven false 12342342134 times because not only the top 1% players are complaining about Covenants being locked. You think the OP is a 1%er? You think i'm a 1%er?

[Zenfoldor]

I min-max. I don't understand anyone who plays an RPG and doesn't try to min-max for the end game.

However, there are others who don't min-max. They don't even know the word min-max. Or some of them do and they just don't care. They are playing the game but don't consider incremental benefits to their character's power to be measurable when grouping with others.

The basic argument between these two types of gamers, as best I can ascertain, is what classifies as measurable. There are many, even non-casuals, even members on this very forum, and even developers, who don't think that any utility difference and most dps variance is relevant at all. This occasionally stems from concept that since most players are so unoptimized to begin with, their covenant choice will make little difference. Afterall, what good is a 10% increase in aoe on one boss for someone who only plays their class to 60% efficiency?

However, community perception in WoW is quite often incorrect. Particularly about things concerning the current meta. It trails, and some ideas get stuck in the mainstream which are no longer relevant. Community perception is much more powerful than the actual meta, because it affects the only portion of WoW(arguably) that player power actually matters, group content. Because covenants are such a ubiquitous, large feature of the expansion, and because of the controversy surrounding them, and also due to each individual's own cognitive dissonance about their own choice, covenant choice could become a factor when choosing pugs group members.

Furthermore, those with the confidence to make a group themselves, may be predisposed to have stronger cognitive dissonance, or more assertive opinions about what the right covenant choice is, for a certain class. For example, you mentioned fire mages perhaps having only one serious option. On MMO-champ this is often discussed generally for all classes, but a group leader who perhaps is heavily invested in the game and who perhaps invests heavily in the current meta of their spec, say, fire mage, may see a mage apply who is in a covenant that said person knows is the least beneficial for fire mages. This could be perceived as a choice by that player, but more likely it will be perceived as an incorrect choice by an unknowledgeable player(even if that is completely untrue). It is also possible that said person with the "wrong" covenant is never given the opportunity to defend their decision or even to explain that the decision was made due to role playing choices(a legit reason), instead of ignorance of the meta.

It is easier to explain by simply making up quotes that one may hear in LFR.

One snide comment might be: "Don't listen to them, they are fire and in Maldraxxus, lol."

I just made that quote up, but I would imagine that such comments will not be completely unheard of when covenants go live. Of course this is all just imho. Also, I know nothing about Maldraxxus or Fire mages(besides playing one heavily in Legion) so the above quote is not based off any covenant or class knowledge, just the contents of the OP. I'm attempting to ad context to the types of comments I would expect for straying from community perception in group content. IMO, comments themselves aren't a huge problem, but the ideas they portray may be, if they are drawn from or into the larger community perception.

[Rayzen17]

First of all nothing is tuned yet, you can expect pretty big changes until raid release.

Secondly, yes - there will be the "go to" covenant for X. Frankly it's just like a spec - you always have a top dog spec and talent choice for every type of content and if you are so laser focused on performance you will take that anyway, so frankly it's a moot point. It's like people sitting as Fire whole 8.3 and not touching Frost with a 10 feet pole and then you have a bit of those who do Arcane.

So yeah, if, let's say - Night Fae Frost becomes the new 8.3 Fire, you will have everyone and their mother play it in high end, but it's the usual FOTM - covenants or not - you always have.

As such, I don't see much reason to sweat there. Instead of, Fire Mage OP WTF, it will be Kyrian Fire Mage OP WTF, which effectively is little difference there anyway.

- - - Updated - - -



This is the healthy way to look on these things. I see people who are totally don't have a horse in this race tryharding shit for god knows what reason and only end up being salty, despite this not being a thing in their level - 90% of the players are simply not in the place where such things truly matter.

So if that's the case, why have all this anxiety over this? If someone wants to go FOTM top performance, he'd do that anyway as usual, for others - whatever.

If someone wants to be Kyrian in PVE, Necrolord in PVP, what exactly is your beef with their choices? Are they FOTM-ing? What kind of proof do you have? Maybe they like the spells in that covenant in that content and not the other.
It's not your business if someone tryhards either n>? You can also be someone who likes to be carried, being lazy and incompetent is also a choice you can personally make (generally speaking ofc), but most people like to do stuff to the best of their knowledge.

[CalamityHeart]

Or Blizzard can facilitate to answer both his(and many others) needs? Increasing his enjoyment in the game.
Uncouple Covenant abilities and soulbinds from the Covenants themselves, where you have the Covenant zone and its facilities for transportation, dailies, transmogs, mounts, pets, etc.... look, it's fixed now.

They most certainly could, and that would be swell. Or... they could end up not doing that.

Until further notice, I'm going to assume that Blizzard will end up not doing that. And as such, all my personal opinions on the matter are going to be based on that assumption.

I wasn't trying to answer the question of "What should Blizzard do about this?" because that wasn't the question that was asked, and I'm honestly sick and tired of reading people whining about their answers to that question. I was addressing the mindset of being "forced" to do something when you have a breadth of choices (something that doesn't magically go away by uncoupling abilities and Soulbinds from their covenants) and offering my opinion on the matter, which is (and will continue to be, whether or not Blizzard uncouples abilities and Soulbinds from their covenants): Just think about what you want, and play that. You'll be better off in the end.

[Rayzen17]

They most certainly could, and that would be swell. Or... they could end up not doing that.

Until further notice, I'm going to assume that Blizzard will end up not doing that. And as such, all my personal opinions on the matter are going to be based on that assumption.

I wasn't trying to answer the question of "What should Blizzard do about this?" because that wasn't the question that was asked, and I'm honestly sick and tired of reading people whining about their answers to that question. I was addressing the mindset of being "forced" to do something when you have a breadth of choices (something that doesn't magically go away by uncoupling abilities and Soulbinds from their covenants) and offering my opinion on the matter, which is (and will continue to be, whether or not Blizzard uncouples abilities and Soulbinds from their covenants): Just think about what you want, and play that. You'll be better off in the end.

I want to play with them all on the same character, to be able to switch when i want, how often i want.
Blizzard is actively preventing me... and others that want that.

In the end they will let us switch, so this shenanigans of being locked for now, is just some side bullshit Blizzard is trying, just like Azerite, Legiondaries, essences and Corruption at the start. Or they could uncouple them from the get go.

Or maybe they could have not started this and uncoupled them from the start. We would not be having these conversations if Blizzard made them so from the start.
People wouldn't be asking: "Oh, how about limiting Covenant switches in some way. That would surely be FUN."
See how ridiculous it sounds? yeah..

[cocomen2]

People wouldn't be asking: "Oh, how about limiting Covenant switches in some way. That would surely be FUN."
See how ridiculous it sounds? yeah..

It would be real fun, if there was some conflict like a war (pvp) among covenants and if you joined one like character "X" then its choice for life .... without any rerolls.

But it would worked only if covenants is eternal integrated into the game, not some borrowed power faction that gonna be removed after 2 year's .

But since game is borrowed-power casino and each 2 years all past choices means nothing , its ridiculous to see "YOU BETRAYED OUR COVENANT" .....4 rerolls later..."champion YOU BETRAYED OUR COVENANT once again, do you have any shame?"

[ihate2beapessimist]

You answered your own question.

The people on alpha will do all the homework for you, and post their answers for you to copy.

All you gotta do is wait like a good little drone and the best option will be mapped out for you. Then you can copy/paste and be the #1 meta covenant.

[Rayzen17]

It would be real fun, if there was some conflict like a war (pvp) among covenants and if you joined one like character "X" then its choice for life .... without any rerolls.

But it would worked only if covenants is eternal integrated into the game, not some borrowed power faction that gonna be removed after 2 year's .

But since game is borrowed-power casino and each 2 years all past choices means nothing , its ridiculous to see "YOU BETRAYED OUR COVENANT" .....4 rerolls later..."champion YOU BETRAYED OUR COVENANT once again, do you have any shame?"

If they were permanent choices they would matter and people would only fight for buffing their own covenant choice. Similar to how everyone wants their own classes buffed. But this is not the case, frankly i would have preferred if they were permanent additions, then it would have been a choice that actually mattered.

And yes.. the "betrayals" are stupid and i'd say these are more against RP than if they wouldn't have a problem you working for the other Covenants for a while... i mean, you get what help you can get right? If anima is such an issue for you, then you'd want the "adventurer" back asap.