View Poll Results: Do you support a significant change to class design?

Voters
261. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes; I support the concepts in this post.

    10 3.83%
  • Yes; but not the ideas in this post.

    136 52.11%
  • No; I don't support a significant change to class design.

    101 38.70%
  • I'm not sure - it's hard to say.

    14 5.36%
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
  1. #201
    Quote Originally Posted by rohoz View Post
    all your evidence says is that rogues were viable and present at 2200, lol.
    rogues are never fotm but are always present. Sounds like a consistently good spec to me but who knows.

    anyway continue being mad that you can't lock someone down for 15+ seconds again. I bet you're gonna say that KS and CS sharing drs is bad too


    And ftr, for a class that counts for 7% player participation, a low of 5% participation 2200+ isn't bad at all.
    That's some impressive backpedaling dude.

    First yesterday you were saying Gouge shouldn't come back because it's bad and useless.

    Now today you're saying it can't come back because Rogues would be broken OP if it did.

    Now in spite of evidence that Rogues were clearly not broken OP under the MoP design your new argument is that they were viable at 2200+.... how does viable at 2200+ equate to being overpowered?

    We have direct evidence that Rogues could be balanced and perfectly fine under the old toolkit. This argument is over and you lost it.
    ClassFantasyTM and ability pruning are absolute garbage & designed specifically for paintlickers

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by shoegazing View Post
    That's some impressive backpedaling dude.

    First yesterday you were saying Gouge shouldn't come back because it's bad and useless.

    Now today you're saying it can't come back because Rogues would be broken OP if it did.

    Now in spite of evidence that Rogues were clearly not broken OP under the MoP design your new argument is that they were viable at 2200+.... how does viable at 2200+ equate to being overpowered?

    We have direct evidence that Rogues could be balanced and perfectly fine under the old toolkit. This argument is over and you lost it.
    RMP has been a gladiator comp since s1. Pretty sure no other comp has enjoyed that.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohoz View Post
    hot take, classes were always 3-5 buttons with 2-3 cooldowns. what they removed were the highly situational garbage spells that never got use.
    For what it's worth, I said this, which was a general statement, and then you proceeded to make it about specifically about you.
    I then said 5 spells and highly situational abilities, which gouge is.

    It must be tiring being so angry all the time. You aint the center of the universe breh

    - - - Updated - - -

  3. #203
    I support that classes do need a significant re-design, so to speak. I really feel that Blizzard should move back to how things used to be. It used to be expected that non-hybrid classes were the top dps, hybrids were close but not at the top unless that player really knew how to play their class. Many people have mentioned it in this thread, class balance and pruning kills the class fun in PVE. I totally get balancing for PVP, if one class if OP then most people will want to play that class only in PVP and not their normal main. Balancing for PVE in my opinion is where Blizz messed up.

    Looking at GW2, class balance in PVE isn't really existent. The DPS spread is so far apart from class/spec to class/spec but each class is still fun and unique to the game. I have seen groups with people on the lower end of a damage meter doing half the damage of the top DPS, yet they don't cry about how unfair it is even if they did the rotation perfectly and have BIS. I feel that is due to because the class is fun and not dumbed down like how WoW has become. I understand not wanting 15 abilities to smash but with some classes only having 4-6 is a little low. Most of them have different cooldown periods that can be timed offering no choice of what to hit next. It feels that it has become more of a game of don't step here as opposed to actually figuring out what abilities to use and when.

  4. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeezo View Post
    What about the question you've quoted is confusing you?

    The question is about what's lost other than eleven specialisations, and you you answer... Specialisations.
    That's like saying what's lost aside the playerbase that plays those specs...oh only the playerbase. You cooked bro?

  5. #205
    Immortal Jeezo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Somewhere fun.
    Posts
    7,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Renedric View Post
    That's like saying what's lost aside the playerbase that plays those specs...oh only the playerbase. You cooked bro?
    Wow.

    Quote a question, answer a completely different one, be given a chance to sort that problem out, then do it again when there's a perfectly reasonable view that doesn't support the whinge.

    And you probably wonder why people just stop talking to you. Congratulations on earning another ignore, 'bro'.

  6. #206
    Nah, this is bad.

    They should just go back to WotLK class design.
    You get a talent every level.
    You get a trio of glyph slots every 25 levels.
    You've got some other stuff to play with, like weapon skills, but maybe something more interesting than weapon skills.

    Vanilla XP curve
    Last edited by LilSaihah; 2019-01-16 at 10:45 AM.
    If you are particularly bold, you could use a Shiny Ditto. Do keep in mind though, this will infuriate your opponents due to Ditto's beauty. Please do not use Shiny Ditto. You have been warned.

  7. #207
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeezo View Post
    Personally, I think class design is at its lowest point.

    It's never been so poor. Not only has the class depth been almost universally removed, the balancing problems between specs are getting worse every development cycle. Class identity has essentially been removed, so much has simply been spread across the classes that exist, and even utility has been spread so widely is covered by pretty much any group.

    To be honest, I'd prefer a complete reset on the class system.

    I'm thinking that a system should actually start with four Basic classes in a system that is built around gear. What that means is that the classes are the Soldier (wears plate), the Servant (wears mail), the Assassin (wears leather) and the Caster (wears cloth). From here, the four Basic classes then develop into three Special classes each, and the player chooses the one they want to be. The choice is permanent. The other big change is that each Special class gets two specialisations, rather than three.

    So, for example:

    - The Soldier becomes a Warrior (Protection or Fury), a Paladin (Retribution or Holy) or a Death Knight (Blood or Undead).
    - The Servant becomes a Hunter (Marksmanship or Beast Mastery), a Shaman (Elemental or Restoration) or a Monk (Brewmaster or Windwalker).
    - The Assassin becomes a Rogue (Assassination or Outlaw), a Druid (Feral or Restoration), or a Demon Hunter (Havoc or Vengeance).
    - The Caster becomes a Mage (Fire or Frost), a Priest (Holy or Shadow) or a Warlock (Demonology or Affliction).

    You should notice that there are the same number of healers and tanks.

    Now, we know that countless players would complain about the loss of a spec they play and would therefore never support such an approach. That's not unreasonable, either. But the plan is to fix a number of the game's currently dominating issues. I'm not being extensive but these issues include the sheer difficulty in balancing 35 specs rather than 24, the loss of class identity and individuality that this issue has caused, the sheer universality of utility that's been created, fixing two to three DPS specs and making them unique, the fact that there are more leather wearers than anything else, and the sheer blandness that has taken over the talent system.

    This concept is a fundamentally different one about class design and play, so it's extremely unlikely to even be considered.

    But that's the route I'd take, so make your point and your vote.


    This is not something new.

    This is Lineage 2.

    Should also rename World of Warcraft to World of Lineage.
    Last edited by qazgosu; 2019-01-16 at 10:49 AM.

  8. #208
    Whatchooo mean? they redesign them, every, single, expansion.

    i know a lot of people that quit due to it.

  9. #209
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeezo View Post
    Wow.

    Quote a question, answer a completely different one, be given a chance to sort that problem out, then do it again when there's a perfectly reasonable view that doesn't support the whinge.

    And you probably wonder why people just stop talking to you. Congratulations on earning another ignore, 'bro'.
    Dont ask retarded questions then.

  10. #210

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •