Development Update: The Road to Shadowlands

[Lorgar Aurelian]

This is a textbook example of moving goal posts. Words matter and I think Preach was pretty direct with his question. If they had no intention of removing it before 9.0 then they should have said that.

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.

[Relapses]

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."

[Eapoe]

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.

[TEHPALLYTANK]

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.

[Aggrophobic]

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.

[Katchii]

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.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

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.

[Relapses]

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.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

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.

[Gaidax]

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.

[Reead]

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.

[Relapses]

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).

[Lorgar Aurelian]

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

[Relapses]

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.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

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.

[Soluna]

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.

[munkeyinorbit]

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.

[Soluna]

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.

[munkeyinorbit]

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.

[Relapses]

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.