Will Blizzard nerf your "meaningful choice"?

[Echo of Soul]

Funny when you think that Ion Hazzikostas is the same gamer who made posts about C'thun being mathematically impossible to kill pre-nerf.
Makes you wonder what happened to the guy? Is Activision really the dark overlord that lured him to the dark side of the Force? Or maybe being inside changes your perspective a bit?
For all the flak Blizzard is getting, WoW is the only MMO that will probably never die. It's a cultural phenomenom, like MtG is for card games. Maybe the truth of the matter is that you have to introduce broken systems like corruptions, to give players hope they can get what they want, and when that hope dies, you just magicaly spawn a vendor, so people can re-sub. Would go nicely with Bellular's conspirational theory.

Ion is only now starting to become an actual decent game designer when he has stopped thinking like a hardcore raider.

[Toybox]

Ye god forbid that there is 1 thing about your character that is actually so "permanent" that you need 2 week cooldown to change it.

If only we didn't raid on a weekly basis

[Boo Radley]

They already did. They took my server and completely changed it.

The most meaningful choice you can possibly make, one that determines everyone you will meet and the experiences you will have. Thrown away to merge us with 5 realms. From low pop to incredibly overpopulated overnight.

Disgusting.

[Scottyjscizzle]

If it doesn't matter, then why do the restriction? People who care are punished and people who don't care, don't care. The covenant choice restriction makes no sense from a lore perspective and it makes no sense from a gameplay perspective either.

"punished" holy hyperbole batman climb down off that fucking cross you giant babies.

[Beefkow]

I mean a second death grip for dk?

Or an improved aoe?

The difference between the 2 is beyond staggering and is potentially the difference between win and losing. But then again nobody cares about winning or losing, it's just a game so..... stop QQing?

[Rageonit]

Ion is only now starting to become an actual decent game designer when he has stopped thinking like a hardcore raider.

This was tongue in cheek :P

[MasterHamster]

You can't appease players who don't want choices while actually having choices.
A very sizeable chunk of the playerbase evidently cannot handle that non-cosmetic choices in RPGs are actually meant to have consequences too, otherwise it was never really a choice to begin with.
But Blizzard doesn't dare making choices have lasting consequences, by the time 9.2 is out they'll most liekly have added an item to let you switch covenant while in a raid or outdoors, just like they didn't stand their ground on people changing talents while in a raid-- why make choices such as choosing talents most optimized for the evening's raid, when you can without any real trouble switch talents in front of the boss, which means you're actually just copypasting whatever talents the community has decided is the "only choice" for that particular boss
Covenants are going to turn into a glorified talent row, but be stuck in a stubborn development hell, just like azerite gear

[MoanaLisa]

True.

But neither should it be designed to be needlessly inconvenient to those min-maxers in the service of enforcing a single version of "interesting" onto the entire playerbase.

I really don't think it's fair for blizzard to make this same mistake again. And players shouldn't have to wait until x.3 for Blizzard to realize that mistake and correct it.

#pulltheripcord

Blizzard has been under pressure from some elements of its audience to reintroduce RPG elements back to the game. RPG design, in the most basic sense, is about making choices for your characters.

It's obvious that when there are several options available that can change the nature of your character and it's stupidly easy to move between those choices then they really aren't choices at all. Just switches that are turned on and off at will.

Covenants are very much an RPG element: Who will you be? What do you choose? Everyone should make that choice if it's to have any meaning.

[Appelgren]

If it turns out a covenant is too good. (ie so good that its picked by the overwhelming majority because its simply the best)

Yes. They will nerf it. As they should. No point having choices if there really arent any choices. We already have talent trees for that with everyone picking cookie cutter builds every expansion etc...

[Echo of Soul]

Blizzard has been under pressure from some elements of its audience to reintroduce RPG elements back to the game. RPG design, in the most basic sense, is about making choices for your characters.

It's obvious that when there are several options available that can change the nature of your character and it's stupidly easy to move between those choices then they really aren't choices at all. Just switches that are turned on and off at will.

Covenants are very much an RPG element: Who will you be? What do you choose? Everyone should make that choice if it's to have any meaning.

Any reasonable person that has played a couple of RPGs realize this. Then there are those that believe that RPGs exclusively means playing dress-up and making narrative choices. You can't really educate those players because they don't understand but more important they don't want to understand.

[Rageonit]

Mythic raiding and 15+ keys are designed for the upper 5%. Evidenced that only 5% of the player base participate in that content. The rest has no interest in it. The point of gear and talent is personal customization, choice and adaption, not only for the ability to be optimal (which is a silly and utopian concept in itself) but for lore, roleplaying or just flavour and fun it self. Not every thing in the game is enjoyed by min-maxing. Please stop pretending min-maxing is the only fun anyone can have in the game.

Right? Being able to customize your character is a cornerstone of an RPG. For most people who ever played an RPG game, the decision to play fire mage or a frost mage has nothing to do with efficiency - those people subconsciusly assume that no matter what you chose, you will be able to "finish" the game (and you should be, if the game is designed properly). An RPG game should never punish you for making a "thematic" character creation/development decision. You can make things rougher for yourself if you go for an exotic, outlandish build (and in every game, single- or multiplayer, some skills will allways be outright better), but even in WoW, the penalty is just delaying the reward (as you will have to make up for your decisions with external player power, like gear).

It's when you read statements like this - that talents and similar systems are designed around min-maxing - that you start to understand that discussions like this have very little point, simply because there's no common ground. For min-maxers, talent system is simply a riddle that needs to be solved; a gamey calculus if you will. They see no theme there, no RPG at all. Those people can claim they too care for RPG elements of the game and give you romantic stories about choosing this or that race, but those stories have any ground to them only because there's very little (if none) player power tied to those decisions. In a way, they want to play two separate games at the same time: a min-max game (which is solely player power based) & the RPG game (which is solely cosmetic). Sacrificing even a bit of one for the other is unacceptable, and every time a game system mixes the two, those players will react with anxiety (and give you plenty of numeric arguments why it's bad for everyone).

Sadly, Blizzard are partly to be blamed. Pushing content like M+ and Mythic raids... Organizing Arena/M+ tournaments - all that creates an impression that min-maxing is something that really matters. When in reality, all it does is giving you the reward earlier.

[Echo of Soul]

In a way, they want to play two separate games at the same time: a min-max game (which is solely player power based) & the RPG game (which is solely cosmetic). Sacrificing even a bit of one for the other is unacceptable, and every time a game system mixes the two, those players will react with anxiety (and give you plenty of numeric arguments why it's bad for everyone).

This is very much the case if you've watched any of the videos from Preach on the topic. It comes off as quite unreasonable and even a bit entitled.
What I find weird is that Preach have played so many RPGs, he should be able to understand this that building your character is a very important part of the genre. Narrative choices are also very important but I wouldn't say that cosmetics are but that's the narrative they're trying to push.

It's like the entire high end community have never played a RPG in their entire lives.

[Gaidax]

This is very much the case if you've watched any of the videos from Preach on the topic. It comes off as quite unreasonable and even a bit entitled.
What I find weird is that Preach have played so many RPGs, he should be able to understand this that building your character is a very important part of the genre. Narrative choices are also very important but I wouldn't say that cosmetics are but that's the narrative they're trying to push.

It's like the entire high end community have never played a RPG in their entire lives.

Many people are trained for years in WoW to view everything as numbers and this is how it turned out. Me too with my 15 years of WoW always raiding high end. It's hard to detach yourself from that and realize that maybe there is something else other than pushing WCL %.

That's why there are so many people who can't even begin to understand the logic behind this addition and that WoW is still a MMORPG and not a MOBA or some sort of PvE Battle Royale.

[Popokolara]

This is very much the case if you've watched any of the videos from Preach on the topic. It comes off as quite unreasonable and even a bit entitled.
What I find weird is that Preach have played so many RPGs, he should be able to understand this that building your character is a very important part of the genre. Narrative choices are also very important but I wouldn't say that cosmetics are but that's the narrative they're trying to push.

It's like the entire high end community have never played a RPG in their entire lives.

The game has a mythic difficulty and is not balanced. Preach supports freedom of swapping exactly because he realises balance is unatainable.
BTW the revelation of the century: Those rpg games all the people in here talk about: they dont have a mythic difficulty on an online 20man format.

people are worshipping suboptimal gameplay like religion, and optimal choice like the devil and a sin that afflicts the saint people because they do not understand the divine deecree of: "ignore efficiency, got a theme - that is the true rpg. Everything permiting otherwise - NOT PREVENTING theme, simply permiting one to stray from the path - is BAD."

I love baldurs gate 2 and make parties depending on what i want. I never take more than 1 mage and i play sword coast stratagems. It makes my life HELL because mages are so necessary with the difficulty enhancing mods. But i like to rp a divine party with druids and clerics. that is what you mean right? rp + mechanical theme. I m quite familiar with it.

Well baldurs is an rpg with no intensive difficulty. and no online 20man format.

The question here is why are people so obsessed with terms like meta slave and fotm. ~what a peculiar thing to focus and condemn people who do a thing u do just a lot harder. Its almost as if...

[Gaidax]

*snip*

KEKW... But balance is unattainable anyway, so what's the point whining about it? It's like one patch your class is dogshit and another it's god and that mother-kissing trinket off final boss that never drops is already on par with covenant choice by itself anyway.

Mythic raiding is glorified as if it's some pinnacle of difficulty, but in reality - it gets nerfed super fast by gear scaling anyway. Those 5% or even 10% from covenant delta lose their meaning very fast there and as a whole.

Besides, what percentage of players even sees Mythic raids?

People are fainting over nonsense. Those 0.1% that truly need to be optimal, because they are actually running for WF or good rank will choose what's best anyway. The rest are just whining over nothing. If you want power - take power, if you want to be a blue fox - take Night Fae - up to you.

[Popokolara]

KEKW... But balance is unattainable anyway, so what's the point whining about it?

Suggesting we design around the reality of the game is whining? Interesting take.

Mythic raiding is glorified as if it's some pinnacle of difficulty, but in reality - it gets nerfed super fast by gear scaling anyway. Those 5% or even 10% from covenant delta lose their meaning very fast there and as a whole.

So you would design around the mythic difficulty once its been nerfed? Also do you raid? as in actual raid? Are you aware of the humongous impact of 1 or 2% of boss hp wipes and how many pulls extra might take to kill? How much stress this causes? Because your statement implies you are not aware of this.

Besides, what percentage of players even sees Mythic raids?

Would you balance around heroic difficulty then? You just argued against designing balance around the situations where balance matters.

If you want power - take power, if you want to be a blue fox - take Night Fae - up to you.

I misjudged you then i thought you disliked the idea of people being able to focus on performance should they wish it.

[Gaidax]

I misjudged you then i thought you disliked the idea of people being able to focus on performance should they wish it.

And they can... Covenant changes nothing, you will still take the optimal setup, as usual.

I know I will.

You don't need to design around anything, Blizzard tunes mythic raids with effective expiration date. It's like my 2 nights 3 hours per night guild clears Nya'lotha in 2 hours with buyers nowadays.

Mythic raids expire very fast by themselves, 2 months in and even if Blizzard does not nerf directly, it's already not the same thing anyway due to gear.

[SirCowdog]

Personally I am fond of the points that SoulSoBreezy makes.

I actually like his take as well, generally speaking. He's got a very healthy approach to things. He used to post here, although I haven't seen him in awhile.

[Popokolara]

And they can... Covenant changes nothing, you will still take the optimal setup, as usual.

I know I will.

You don't need to design around anything, Blizzard tunes mythic raids with effective expiration date. It's like my 2 nights 3 hours per night guild clears Nya'lotha in 2 hours with buyers nowadays.

Mythic raids expire very fast by themselves, 2 months in and even if Blizzard does not nerf directly, it's already not the same thing anyway due to gear.

how will you take optimal setup when you have one covenant for raid another for m+ and a third for pvp?

"You dont need to design around anything." Wow. simply stunned by the wisdom. Because you can clear one of the easiest raids ever with the landslide effect of corruptions with buyers shortly before next expac, you make a general statement on the need for developement of hardest difficulty of the game. Go post that on the forums so they know to not waste any more resources on balancing.

[Gaidax]

how will you take optimal setup when you have one covenant for raid another for m+ and a third for pvp?

"You dont need to design around anything." Wow. simply stunned by the wisdom. go post that on the forums so they know to not waste any more resources on balancing.

Very easily - you will take a covenant for raiding and there is a pretty damn good chance that even if it's not no.1 for M+, it's at the very least still good there.

You will survive with that somehow. Just like I can survive with Warlocks being kickass for raiding and PvP and weak in M+.


PvP is the only real differentiator, but quite frankly how many people are there that are running for World First, +30 keys AND top dog PvP rating? Maybe couple hundreds if that... Whoa stop the presses here, we might inconvenience a hundred or so of guys/gals.