Now that its been proven min maxes are the majority will content change?

[Simple Rick]

With covenants we finally found a way to put to the old argument to rest. Min maxing is what matters to the vast majority of players. Most specs have upwards of 90% of the active player base picking the covenant that offers them the best performance. (There are some exceptions like havoc but that specs dead and its abysmal numbers seem to point towards min maxing rather then against.)

Now that the old argument has been put to rest do you think in the future we will see blizzard moving away from meaningless systems like covenants and relics now that it has been shown players only care about what gives the best performance barring a tiny minority?

[Lochton]

With covenants we finally found a way to put to the old argument to rest. Min maxing is what matters to the vast majority of players. Most specs have upwards of 90% of the active player base picking the covenant that offers them the best performance. (There are some exceptions like havoc but that specs dead and its abysmal numbers seem to point towards min maxing rather then against.)

Now that the old argument has been put to rest do you think in the future we will see blizzard moving away from meaningless systems like covenants and relics now that it has been shown players only care about what gives the best performance barring a tiny minority?

Hopefully, it will change to work against the min/maxing attitude but then another method comes. We'll forever see people creating a method that becomes everyone's recipe.

[Enter Name Here]

sure, they could make the optimal choices more tedious to get in order to squeeze out more played time

[Schizoide]

If the difference is substantial, say well over 10%, players always pick the best one. It feels mandatory. If they're within 5-10% in all situations, players pick whichever playstyle they personally prefer.

For example, looking at Hunter legendaries in 9.0, the totally fucking terrible gameplay where you have to use two GCDs with different cooldowns and both ground targeted felt mandatory in progression because the #2 legendary which was basically passive (+X% crit damage inside a cooldown) was fairly far behind. Now in 9.0.5 the #2 was buffed and it feels fine to use. Yes a bit behind, but not too far.

Perfect balance isn't required, but having one choice be the best in all situations by a heavy margin is simply not OK. They need to put SOME effort into balance.

[Doffen]

If you ignore that the best covenant also often are the best fit themeatically, sure.

[Theangryone]

All Shadowlands proves is that the majority of players will choose the path of least resistance in order to obtain group invites or complete whatever content they enjoy.

[Argorwal]

All Shadowlands proves is that the majority of players will choose the path of least resistance in order to obtain group invites or complete whatever content they enjoy.

Something we’ve known for a while.

There is a reason like 30% of classic characters are warriors after all.

[Razion]

Players won't stop asking for choice, though. It's not like all players know this concretely and even if they do they'll still paradoxically ask for the same things that brought about Covenants in the first place. Covenants came from a community desire that they believed filled that need. Even though players apparently just min-max when given the choice, that may as well have been the case before, so what's going to stop players from asking for things that basically offer the same thing while falling into their old trappings again?

[Katchii]

All Shadowlands proves is that the majority of players will choose the path of least resistance in order to obtain group invites or complete whatever content they enjoy.

This.

It's not necessarily that the vast majority of players actually care about it. It could be simply that they don't care at all and just go with what the min/maxers want so they don't get shit for it and just want to play the game and get groups.

I've seen just as many threads and comments saying the opposite that Covenant choice DOES have an impact, but not so much that it affects whether or not you can do the content. Basically saying, play what you want.

[Simple Rick]

Hopefully, it will change to work against the min/maxing attitude but then another method comes. We'll forever see people creating a method that becomes everyone's recipe.

I mean why fight it?

If you accept people pick what is best it has to free up resources to build other content rather then desperately trying to fight the playerbase on it.

- - - Updated - - -

Players won't stop asking for choice, though. It's not like all players know this concretely and even if they do they'll still paradoxically ask for the same things that brought about Covenants in the first place. Covenants came from a community desire that they believed filled that need. Even though players apparently just min-max when given the choice, that may as well have been the case before, so what's going to stop players from asking for things that basically offer the same thing while falling into their old trappings again?

I mean you just ignore them or realize what it is they want.

I think the reason why class halls were seen in such a positive light is because they didn't offer power but different narratives and cosmetics. I think if blizzard had the courage to not tie power to a new system and just made covenants cosmetics everyone would of won.

[GreenJesus]

I mean why fight it?

If you accept people pick what is best it has to free up resources to build other content rather then desperately trying to fight the playerbase on it.

- - - Updated - - -



I mean you just ignore them or realize what it is they want.

I think the reason why class halls were seen in such a positive light is because they didn't offer power but different narratives and cosmetics. I think if blizzard had the courage to not tie power to a new system and just made covenants cosmetics everyone would of won.

Exactly. The abilities could have been on a talent tree to choose, but you could choose a covenant to represent for cosmetic and zone unlock purposes. To me it feels like they just restricted content by only allowing you to experience one. Back in the day each covenant would be a different rep you could experience on one character.

[Azerate]

Pretty weak troll post.

Nothing of the sort has been proven. 80% of the good covenant choices overlap with what fits best thematically/lorewise hence why most people are choosing it.

[clevin]

If you ignore that the best covenant also often are the best fit themeatically, sure.

Precisely. Is NF my best choice from a min-max perspective as a balance druid? Yes. Is it also the most obvious choice thematically? Also yes. Same for Pallies and Kyrian, etc.

This might shock the OP and others, but Blizzard seems to have worked to make the obvious thematic choice for a class also very good choices for character power for those same classes.

[msdos]

I thought I would like the Covenants before Shadowlands came out, but the abilities and traits all got nerfed into the ground and the Kyrian DK one is just extremely bad, they gutted it in beta, along with everything else; spending runes used to reduce the CD of it. Then they had to rebuff it again.

They just keep nerf/buffing stuff over and over again and only the people with gold fish memory and toddler attention spans don't notice.

[Jastall]

If you ignore that the best covenant also often are the best fit themeatically, sure.

Or are the most fun to use. Loads of Warriors I know picked Venthyr, not just because it's the best ST Covenant, but because Condemn is hella more fun to use than one-off abilities.

But yeah, Night Fae Druids and Hunters, Kyrian Paladins and Priests, and Necrolords DKs just make sense, to use only these examples. Some classes don't have obvious chocies thematically (such as Shaman, Rogues or Warriors) and that's actually where you see a wider spread more often than not, which would at least help disprove the OP's assertions.

[h8ryan]

I thought I would like the Covenants before Shadowlands came out, but the abilities and traits all got nerfed into the ground and the Kyrian DK one is just extremely bad, they gutted it in beta, along with everything else; spending runes used to reduce the CD of it. Then they had to rebuff it again.

They just keep nerf/buffing stuff over and over again and only the people with gold fish memory and toddler attention spans don't notice.

194 ilevel, 14 renown, 0/10 bosses down on Heroic

Define "extremely bad" because it seems like you don't actually have any idea

[Razion]

I mean you just ignore them or realize what it is they want.

I think the reason why class halls were seen in such a positive light is because they didn't offer power but different narratives and cosmetics. I think if blizzard had the courage to not tie power to a new system and just made covenants cosmetics everyone would of won.

I think players want new abilities in expansions to freshen up gameplay. The problem with just offering cosmetic variants of the same ability is that mechanically it would all feel the same. And it wouldn't feel like you were getting much tactile variety for as much visual options you're getting. Especially painful when it's a major feature point of an expansion, these new abilities that are going to be the bulk of what is changing for your character potentially in gameplay. If everyone got all the options as well, it wouldn't feel like you had any choice or agency.

In expansions like BC and Wrath, new abilities were added flatly to the new game. The bloat eventually when removed resulted in a lot of complaining, and with the new talents in Mists, they couldn't just keep adding to the talent tree forever because it would result in more bloat later and again another large pruning that people would complain about. So, abilities offered on a more temporary basis were introduced so that the pain of removal wasn't as high, though it would become more frequent. In an ideal world all the Covenant Powers would have been balanced to be equal and the power wouldn't have been an issue - but players still gravitate to whatever number is higher by however little it is as long as a guide is telling them to do it.

I think just being given flat class abilities, with no choice in visual cosmetic, like in BC and Wrath, holds generally the problem that mechanically it can make classes and specs feel like they aren't changing enough to spice things up enough and also can lead down a road where more classes and specs start to feel the same, and brings about a lot of homogenization that people seem to also not like. Also, people may then feel that they don't really have any agency in changing how their characters play from expansion to expansion either, if so much new content is always just added to everyone who plays those classes or specs. Compounded when offered the same mechanical ability that has different choice visuals, it also plays into that issue of the choice ultimately not being very impactful (and maybe also resulting in less abilities total for an expansion, because the art is going to the same ability in different visual trappings). Ultimately a feeling I think would come around that the choice doesn't feel meaningful because it doesn't impact gameplay. Some players literally only care about gameplay, about raiding, about numbers, while some other players prefer cosmetics and visuals. We seem to see from data that players always will pick higher numbers because ultimately they want to succeed. The content could be made easier, so that all options are so obviously viable it isn't even a question at that point, but then players would probably just lose interest in the content itself rather than being satisfied by the options they have.

[Lochton]

I mean why fight it?

If you accept people pick what is best it has to free up resources to build other content rather then desperately trying to fight the playerbase on it.

Fighting it because it limits future options of trial and error if everything should just be on a single track.

[Hellobolis]

min/maxers aren't the majority. people who look up a guide for one reason or another are. i think those are significantly different even if the end result is more or less the same.

the big question is: could that ever be reversed or is the game too far gone. probably the latter, especially if you throw the balance is never good enough wombo combo on top.

does that mean covenants are inherently bad? not really since i think the game is much more designed around being expected to have an alt these days. and honestly swapping covenant isn't that big of a hassle, sure it's no rested area whenever you want, but you can catch up on the player power part in no time.

[Simple Rick]

Precisely. Is NF my best choice from a min-max perspective as a balance druid? Yes. Is it also the most obvious choice thematically? Also yes. Same for Pallies and Kyrian, etc.

This might shock the OP and others, but Blizzard seems to have worked to make the obvious thematic choice for a class also very good choices for character power for those same classes.

So how do you explain the classes that don't fit any of the themes?

The only spec. Not class but spec with a healthy break down is havoc and to be honest that seems to be a dead spec.