Do you think they will release classic with unviable specializations?

[KingKaom]

I know a lot of the crowd wants a pure vanilla experience? But do you really think blizzard will release classic and only warriors will be able to tank? Generally curious?

[Sliske]

1. Yes. They're not releasing classic 2.0, they're releasing classic.

2. More than warriors could tank. People were just fucking terrible back in vanilla and had no idea how to theorycraft.

[Hunterwep]

Well for example if they allow Paladins to tank, it will create a faction imbalance because Alliance get an extra Tanking role.
To make up for this out they would in turn have to redesign Shamans so they can tank also.
And *POOF* the domino chain effect of balancing one after another started.

You can't have a Classic Formula 1 race with cars from the 60's and allow one dude to bring his Modern 2018 racing car.

[LordSothe]

If they change anything at all they open themselves up to "It's not REALLY vanilla!" backlash.

They should launch with things exactly the way they were. If people love it, great, if not, at least they got what they thought they wanted.

[Lollis]

2. More than warriors could tank. People were just fucking terrible back in vanilla and had no idea how to theorycraft.

Because none of use knew about crushing blow mechanic, threat, or mana issues, nope.

Druids and Paladins could tank some very early stuff, and could sort of manage in the middle tier when they had really good gear, but Warriors maintanked in AQ and Naxx for a reason.

[ZazuuPriest]

Because none of use knew about crushing blow mechanic, threat, or mana issues, nope.

Druids and Paladins could tank some very early stuff, and could sort of manage in the middle tier when they had really good gear, but Warriors maintanked in AQ and Naxx for a reason.

this is pretty much 100. Druids get slapped pretty hard, having to spam flash heal on a dude and still worry about renews and healing the dps that he couldnt hold threat on was an easy way to go oom pretty fast

[KingKaom]

What are the other specs that weren’t played?

Demo, Ele sham?

[Gorgodeus]

1. Yes. They're not releasing classic 2.0, they're releasing classic.

Ever occur to you as to why Blizzard did not name it Vanilla? They have already stated that it will not be exactly as it was in Vanilla. They would not be asking for input on what to add and/or change if they intended it to actually be 100% Vanilla.

[arkanon]

1. Yes. They're not releasing VANILLA 2.0, they're releasing classic.

2. More than warriors could tank. People were just fucking terrible back in vanilla and had no idea how to theorycraft.

To be Fair, unless they found taunts that specs didnt have, theory crafting can only go so far. And for the love of god, please understand the difference between 'vanilla' and 'classic'.

[stevenho]

Yes we think bliizard is targeting the private server community which recreates vanilla 100%.\
If you want to tank raids on your paladin, play bfa.

[callipygoustp]

I have yet to see anything that would suggest otherwise.

[meroko]

1. Yes. They're not releasing classic 2.0, they're releasing classic.

2. More than warriors could tank. People were just fucking terrible back in vanilla and had no idea how to theorycraft.

I hate to be THAT guy but that's exactly what you're gonna get. I'm just going by recent dev communication, they are already hinting at making changes anyway. I don't necessarily see Classic 2.0 as a bad thing. I wouldn't mind the classic game experience with a more balanced design around all classes and specs...it would only improve the experience, imo. But we'll see.

[Roxyfoxy]

Ever occur to you as to why Blizzard did not name it Vanilla? They have already stated that it will not be exactly as it was in Vanilla. They would not be asking for input on what to add and/or change if they intended it to actually be 100% Vanilla.

You do know that "Classic" is blizzards official name for what we call vanilla right? Vanilla is a fan made name, but blizzard have always called it classic

[A Chozo]

Well they should, it was a part of the social experience.

If they fix specs, they will fall into the slope, and soon everyone will be demanding balance patches left and right.

[Triden]

I hate to be THAT guy but that's exactly what you're gonna get. I'm just going by recent dev communication, they are already hinting at making changes anyway. I don't necessarily see Classic 2.0 as a bad thing. I wouldn't mind the classic game experience with a more balanced design around all classes and specs...it would only improve the experience, imo. But we'll see.

Well, the changes they're looking at are "should we use high resolution models or no?" or "should we release UBRS as a 15 man or a 10 man?". Not, "should we fundamentally change a class to play in a way that it never played during Vanilla?". Here's the quote from Brack in the Forbes interview from January:

Brack: ... I think my starting place is, the compass heading should be to try to re-create the original 2004, 2005 experience. That’s the compass heading we should be following. But there’s a lot of nuance there. Should we be using the high definition character models? That’s an interesting question, I think, that the community will help us decide.

You don't recreate the 2004/2005 experience by making fundamental balance changes that change the feel of the game. The whole classic venture is about letting people who never had the opportunity (or people who want to have it again) to experience WoW as it was when it first came out. I suspect we'll see bug fixes, but no major balancing changes. All the nuance will involve "which changes that were made over the course of the two years Vanilla was out will we introduce and how?". Not "what will we add that was never in the game to begin with".

[Grofatso]

Just because some specs would not be on par with the best does not make them unviable. They might not be wanted in high end guilds, but this again is just a matter of a choice, as always: you conform to the rules of a guild or find a new one. Not all guilds will frown on certain specs, and it's possible to clear all the content with a bit of lighter touch too, most likely not get world firsts, but that's how the game has always been and still is.

[Loxotron]

I just hope if they will change somethnig they will keep in mind pvp as a main pillar of balance, i don't want pvp being worse because of pve carebears who want to tank or dps as hybrid class. I hope Blizzard understands it and pick the safe path of not changing anything in terms of balance at least at the beginning.

[durenas]

1. Yes. They're not releasing classic 2.0, they're releasing classic.

2. More than warriors could tank. People were just fucking terrible back in vanilla and had no idea how to theorycraft.

Warriors were the only class able to taunt. And many classic mechanics required frequent tank swaps. 4 Horsemen comes to mind.

[Roxyfoxy]

Warriors were the only class able to taunt. And many classic mechanics required frequent tank swaps. 4 Horsemen comes to mind.

Druids could taunt, so warrior is definatly not the only class with a taunt, druids were also used often on four horsemen. The warrior t3 4p is overrated

[tankbug]

They will release it as it was.
They expect that classic gamers value authenticity over balance and progression, and will embrace the challenge of "making it work" instead of forcing themselves into the highest value roles.