Celestalon insight about rogues (not mentioned in mmo-champion blue posts)

[truevalon]

If they have "broken" all the classes then what exactly will people reroll to?

- - - Updated - - -




I'd say that personalized combat points are a groundbreaking change to rogues

Extremly poorly implemented with no UI support at all, and a clear statement that it is not a issue they are planning to fix anytime soon

[Deleted]

Extremly poorly implemented with no UI support at all, and a clear statement that it is not a issue they are planning to fix anytime soon

Beta? I mean what?

[truevalon]

Extremly poorly implemented with no UI support at all, and a clear statement that it is not a issue they are planning to fix anytime soon

If by personalized combat points being on the rogue you are refering to combo points then you have my answer. The implementation of it is halfhearted, buggy and so far no plans to fix the issues it has caused. Hardly groundbreaking :P

[Goradan]

Well I might not know much about rouges but form looking at the specs I think that the class has very little diversity than a mage or a Lock

[Jaojin]

Your comparison would hold if they did not introduce a 34th and 35th machine (warrior gladiator stance and the shadow priest actually playing in two different ways now) on places where we don’t need extra machines. If they did not introduce these, we would have more time to handle with the so called ‘low priority’ machines.

- - - Updated - - -


instead, the code is working slowly, which is not desirable either. yes, writing code that doesn't work is worse, but nobody is happy with slow code either.

Well technically I did address the first part. Machines = specs, parts = talents. Gladiator stance is a talent, and shadow was probably on the list for 'not working properly'.

Here's the deal, whether or not your talents are attractive, your kit is viable and your output is good. Always a good thing to have a rogue in the group (except in parts where all melee suffer, even then rogues can suffer less). I don't think I need to explain about why for PvP nor could I really, as I stay away from it mostly; but in PvE having a rogue was the difference between pushing content or not. You might also want to think that parts of the class that you don't like, might just be parts of the class. The more you make class x like class y the harder it is to tell the two apart.

This thread is sad because it's true.

Also, you can tell the people who don't play rogues because they defend this garbage.

To be honest I happen to agree that energy is a terrible resource, and the fact that both combo builders and spenders both function off the same source makes it annoying slow to play. Monks are much more fluid using an additional resource, and while you may think "They get all the good stuff while we sit here and stagnate!" realize that before every release there is a test, and they use new things to test systems that could be retrofitted to old ones (so that they can test new ideas without breaking old designs). Neither can you claim that you've been totally forgotten for the new expansion. One of the major things wrong with combo points is finally being addressed. And if y'all want to get all uppity about how long it took just for that, then I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't understand the cautious perspective I was trying to impart.

[Deleted]

None of these things would be lost, you just have them on a different character. Most achievements and titles are shared anyway, and unattainable armor and weapons don't benefit you in day-day play. For showing-off purposes, you can always log on your rogue.

Argument: Dispelled.

Wrong, reputations are lost on another character, which means each time you want to buy something from rep, you'd have to log on your main character, if what you need isn't soulbound on purchase either. Same for PVP, you would keep the title but as for players killed you'd have to start from scratch again. Maybe if Blizzard merged everything to the player instead of the character it would make a difference.

[Deleted]

Well technically I did address the first part. Machines = specs, parts = talents. Gladiator stance is a talent, and shadow was probably on the list for 'not working properly'.

Here's the deal, whether or not your talents are attractive, your kit is viable and your output is good. Always a good thing to have a rogue in the group (except in parts where all melee suffer, even then rogues can suffer less). I don't think I need to explain about why for PvP nor could I really, as I stay away from it mostly; but in PvE having a rogue was the difference between pushing content or not. You might also want to think that parts of the class that you don't like, might just be parts of the class. The more you make class x like class y the harder it is to tell the two apart.

Gladiator stance changes the way that spec is played from a tanking spec to a DPS spec, so to assume that this talent is basically adding a 4th spec is not too far fetched, I guess. Both the gladiator stance and the defensive stance has to be tuned accordingly, other talent rows have to work with this stance, etc.
Same goes for the shadow priest: that one talent changes completely how it is played.
(although to a lesser impact than the gladiator stance)
My point was and still is: they have time to put something not really necessary in for warrior (you can argue about the priest, but I see it as not really necessary too), something that takes time to develop and tune. And this time could have been used for rogues instead. But they chose not to. They deemed the warrior stance more important than the complete rogue talent tree, is what I make of that.

Nobody has argued that the rogue is not functional and that their kit is not usable in raids. Because they are. Most people don’t have problems with how high their damage is, but with how passive it is and how little talents do to change it.

[Hitei]

I would really like to see ONE valid, rational, logical argument answering the following question:

Why is an ability I actively use, that does a large yellow number supposedly better, than an ability that I actively use which buffs my passive damage output?

The answer: "Because I like big numbers." is not a rational explanation, its purely emotional.
The answer: "Because it requires more skill." is wrong, because in both cases, its the player pressing or not pressing a button.
The answer: "Because the first requires timing." is wrong, because if these spells make the majority of the spec, they are used regularly.

So please guys, answer the question. Because I am getting a bit tired of people just repeating statements which are purely based on their personal preferences ad nauseam, and try to present it as a valid argument. Want big yellow hits? There are classes for that.

Your strawman mastery is incredible. No where did I say that a direct damage ability is better than an active buff ability.
I pointed out that none of the listed characteristics of rogue identity had any implication of passive damage, e.g. auto-attacks and poison, which are completely different from active buffs.

But sure, I'll play along.

Direct damage abilities are better because they involve the player actively choosing to do damage.
It is more interesting to click an ability and have it do damage to a target, than for your character to just always be attacking, and you hit a button every thirty seconds that makes your character attack very slightly faster.

It has nothing to do with big numbers, skill, or timing, and everything to do with it not being engaging for 60% of the damage you do to be from your character just passively attacking. Using abilities should not be a minor part of rotational gameplay.

Please actually read people's posts and respond to what they are saying, instead of pulling some arbitrary argument out of thin air next time.

[Feali]

Nobody has argued that the rogue is not functional and that their kit is not usable in raids. Because they are. Most people don’t have problems with how high their damage is, but with how passive it is and how little talents do to change it.

The thing with this is that everything they do for Rogues (which isn't that much to start with) is against their whole philosophy when engaging other classes.
E.g: Hunter talents, passive damage.

[Deleted]

Your strawman mastery is incredible. No where did I say that a direct damage ability is better than an active buff ability.

I am well aware of that. I was using your posting as an introductory vehicle to transport a certain message, it was not my intention to build a strawman. Apologies if it was received as such.

Direct damage abilities are better because they involve the player actively choosing to do damage.

The same is true for keeping a high Envenom Uptime or refreshing SnD, its a choice made by the player that results in higher damage.

It is more interesting to click an ability and have it do damage to a target, than for your character to just always be attacking, and you hit a button every thirty seconds that makes your character attack very slightly faster.

"It is more interesting" is a purely emotional response, based on personal opinion, not rational arguments. I was not asking for opinions, I asked for logic.

It has nothing to do with big numbers, skill, or timing, and everything to do with it not being engaging for 60% of the damage you do to be from your character just passively attacking. Using abilities should not be a minor part of rotational gameplay.

"it not being engaging" is just another personal opinion. And a buff or debuff which I have to actively maintain, is also an ability.

[Feali]

The same is true for keeping a high Envenom Uptime or refreshing SnD, its a choice made by the player that results in higher damage.

You're kidding right?
It's not a choice. If you don't use it you didn't understand the class or the game at all.

[Tziva]

"It is more interesting" is a purely emotional response, based on personal opinion, not rational arguments. I was not asking for opinions, I asked for logic.

"it not being engaging" is just another personal opinion. And a buff or debuff which I have to actively maintain, is also an ability.

I think the problem is that you're coming into a thread where people want to talk about their subjectively feelings on general characteristics of the class (how fun, cool, engaging, dynamic, interesting, etc) and their reasons for those feelings and you're trying to dismiss those feelings with statements about acceptable numbers. No one is talking about the numbers. No one is complaining about the numbers. This is a thread about interesting/engaging; it's about personal opinion. If you don't think subjective experience and feelings for the class are worth discussing, then maybe this just isn't the thread for you to be in.

If you want a discussion on objective numbers that isn't diluted by subjective experiences, then make one, and we can all hang out and agree our numbers are fine.

[Kael]

This is a thread about interesting/engaging; it's about personal opinion. If you don't think subjective experience and feelings for the class are worth discussing, then maybe this just isn't the thread for you to be in.

Moreover, your arguments tend to rely on the idea that "there's no objective case for rogues being a poor class" (not a direct quote). The problem with this is that there is no such that as even one objective, purely logical way to analyze good or bad class mechanics. Everything, by nature of being a judgment of design, is subjective and irrational. That said, we have objective heuristics, like number of people playing the class, and playing it in which environments, and amount of positive and negative feedback is received on subjects about the class.

You can deny every heuristic available, but at the end of the day, you're asking for the same thing you argue is wrong: why is the opinion of 6.6% of WoW players (less than, since the entire rogue pop isn't happy) more important than the potential population of the rogue class after changes? To take that argument further, 100% of active accounts are paying for the game as it is - why change anything? Obviously there are some people who will be upset with the lack of changes that are being added, but we're all valuable customers who don't deserve to have our gameplay changed. SoO for life.

Project 1999, baby.

...so unless you have an actual argument, please stop bringing up that there's no objective case for the rogue class not being the ideal rogue class.

[Deleted]

You're kidding right?
It's not a choice. If you don't use it you didn't understand the class or the game at all.

Neither is the useage of the hypothetical "Awesome-Turn-Energy-Into-Big-Hit" - Ability if it existed. If you want to maximise your dps, you will use what gives you the most boom for your energy, easy as that.
There is no difference between a "omg-I-hit-so-Hard-Naow!" - Ability, and a Buff to our Auto Attacks / Proccs, other than personal opinion what we like best, mine being just as valid as yours.

I think the problem is that you're coming into a thread where people want to talk about their subjectively feelings on general characteristics of the class (how fun, cool, engaging, dynamic, interesting, etc) and their reasons for those feelings and you're trying to dismiss those feelings with statements about acceptable numbers.

...so unless you have an actual argument, please stop bringing up that there's no objective case for the rogue class not being the ideal rogue class.

Fair enough. I have been carried away a bit, in my attempts at proving that there is nothing, technically, wrong with our class. To come back to the topic: I like the rogue as it is right now. In time tough, I want to see changes, and, to probably some peoples surprise, I too would like to see our talents being more impactful.

Coming from a time in the game, where it was normal procedure to change ones gear (based on resistences mostly) before a pull, I actually relish the idea of tailoring my talent distribution to each singular fight.

But: If such changes come, I would rather wait for them being well balanced and thought through, then see hastily pushed trough, half-baked "omg-exciting-new.feature.awesome-sauce!", which is exactly what I mean when I say "change for changes sake alone".

[ymirsson]

Neither is the useage of the hypothetical "Awesome-Turn-Energy-Into-Big-Hit" - Ability if it existed. If you want to maximise your dps, you will use what gives you the most boom for your energy, easy as that.

My point stands, non-devalued. There is no difference between a "omg-I-hit-so-Hard-Naow!" - Ability, and a Buff to our Auto Attacks / Proccs.

PvP? The subjective feel of gameplay? Opinion? DPS being Damage per second, not average damage per infinite fight?

Your point does not stand, you simply fail to grasp (or willfully ignore) the matter discussed and repeat saying that rogues are fine and haste will fix it.

Does Celestalon pay by check or paypal? Or does he send you money by mail?

[Deleted]

PvP? The subjective feel of gameplay? Opinion? DPS being Damage per second, not average damage per infinite fight?

Your point does not stand, you simply fail to grasp (or willfully ignore) the matter discussed and repeat saying that rogues are fine and haste will fix it.

Does Celestalon pay by check or paypal? Or does he send you money by mail?

No, but I get a nice cake for my birthday.
Not from him tough...

[Skarzog]

"It is more interesting" is a purely emotional response, based on personal opinion, not rational arguments. I was not asking for opinions, I asked for logic.

Oh please stop, next thing you are gong to start arguing about logical falliacies.

This is a video game, emotional response and personal opinions are quite important. The fact the the class works is not really a good selling point for any game. I don't think I've ever seen a press release of some video game where the primary selling point is "OUR GAME WORKS." Well yea that is pretty much the minimum for any game is for it to be functional.By that "logic" the game should have ended in WotLK when subscriptions were at their highest. Clearly the game was quite functional, why release new content? We could have just done ICC forever. Would it get stale and boring? Well thats an emotional response and personal opinion, it should not factor into game design, right? Why use spice on your food it does not add any nutritional value; its not logical. Why produce vehicles in multiple colors, it adds nothing to the performance; its not logical.

So maybe on planet Vulcan you can apply logic to the value of all forms of enterainment, but it does not work that way here for us humans.

[Tziva]

I'd say that personalized combat points are a groundbreaking change to rogues

Fair point. It's a huge change that we have been asking for for a long time.

(honestly, and maybe I am crazy - I wouldn't have minded if they had just removed the cooldown from redirect as a solution. I kinda actually like the extra level of effort required to move the points around via hotkey. The ridiculous part was needing a glyph slot to shorten a cooldown that IMO shouldn't even exist)

Anyway.

[Willoughby]

"It is more interesting" is a purely emotional response, based on personal opinion, not rational arguments.

Fun is entirely emotional, subjective and irrational.

Are you a robot?

[Sesshou]

I'd say that personalized combat points are a groundbreaking change to rogues

Fair point. It's a huge change that we have been asking for for a long time.

I wouldn't agree. It isn't ground breaking because paladins have had it since 4.0. More like a long overdue QoL change for rogues than a 'groundbreaking change'. That ground was broken years ago.