1. #61921
    Stood in the Fire Lady Atia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    The Rumour Tower
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by Lahis View Post
    It was originally stated to be the reason we could escape the Maw. Most likely that part got removed after they finished The 10-50 leveling revamp and made it so that new characters post 9.0 never get HoA.
    Wait, new characters never get the HoA???

    I'm just checking this on Beta, and for my copied lvl 45 Paladin both the Battle for Lordaeron and Stormwind Stealth are available, although the last is no longer skippable. But yeah, "A Dying World" is no longer available ... weird - so its use for timewalking is only for people who played BfA?

    Edit: Seems like you can get it once you reach level 50 now:

    "I tested this recently with a 1-50 character on PTR, the HoA questline only becomes available at level 50. Getting awarded azerite while levelling to 50 (but that just having vanished when you finally do get the HoA) feels like an insult, but I understand it was probably left in to allow characters that had already acquired a HoA before the prepatch to continue as before. Nevertheless, it should be possible to tweak those quest rewards to give more gold or XP instead of Azerite – or just convert the Azerite into rested XP?"

    https://eu.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...racters/175952
    Last edited by Lady Atia; 2020-09-14 at 04:19 PM.

  2. #61922
    Quote Originally Posted by rainhard View Post
    I think in blizzcon they just said that we escape the maw because the heart activates the stone thing not that it depletes its power doing so but its powers will not work in the lands of the dead other than that of course.
    Yeah, I probably misremember that but I know it was something with the heart.

  3. #61923
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Atia View Post
    Wait, new character never get the HoA???
    Nope, the revamped levelling experience takes you straight to your respective BfA capital and gets you started with it immediately. Some of the BfA quests now include neck reward options to compensate for the lack of HoA.

  4. #61924
    Quote Originally Posted by Ariamis View Post
    It's absolutely manufactured; create so many variables that we'll be weeks into launch before we know know what is / isn't "optimal" - assuming there is a universally optimal option. We'll make the decision, be a few weeks into renown levelling / sanctum upgrades, and need to decide whether or not to abandon the decision we've made. Do we take the throughput loss of conduits, and set ourselves back to the grind? Is it worth it during Mythic progression? Do you switch to solve boss 6, then grind your ass off to be back in shape for boss 7? Or is this something we explore post-progression?

    This is going to be a class-by-class, ability by ability decision - that's where our focus should be IMO. Discussing the theoretical whole doesn't help, but if we can discuss the weight of changing individual abilities, we can draw attention to the true flaws here; only by doing so can we start changing minds.
    If it's manufactured, it's pretty poorly done. The only reason there isn't an immediate consensus is the amount of tuning (and outright non-functioning abilities). What Blizzard doesn't seem to get is that regardless of a case by case scenario, someone will always view a choice as "optimal," but they've actually had good examples in the past of rows that are hard choices because they're good abilities shared on a single talent row. Adapting to new situations and difficulties makes things more interesting, not less.

    I honestly feel like making this inflexible actually puts them in a position to make their job easier, not to make the game better. If there was flexibility in their abilities, it would mean that they would actually need to try at making it difficult to decide which is good in certain situations.

    The corruption problem is an interesting thought experiment. Sure as shit it broke the game, and amplified the RNG issues pervading BFA, but the vendor enabled a power curve that casual players rarely get to experience. For all the Rextroy tricks and 30-tank run shenanigans, there are plenty of players pushing through raid encounters and keys they'd normally be unable to - directly as consequence of this clusterfuck. Those experiences still matter, even while many of us scoff at insta-gib stars.
    No argument there - but it's worth pointing out that the corruption vendor happened because of the community. If people were mum about it, nothing would happen. I ultimately think it did more good than harm, even if there's some ridiculous bullshit afoot. Because people were still getting nonsensical, unfair combinations, it was just due to lotto winning or paying a fuckton of gold.

    I would argue that incomplete data is just as dangerous as no data; I think the spreadsheet is a good enough example. Someone put that shit out into the wilds, and a large chunk of us were sent into a rabid confirmation-bias induced frenzy. I imagine it's easy to sink back into corporate talking points when this is what your community presents as their compelling argument. It compromises the discussion, and creates undue animosity between players and developers.
    Then developers need thicker skin. They're the ones holding the power, they are the ones beholden to the community's reactions, and they are the ones that have earned the lack of faith they're hemorrhaging. All of the systems through Legion and BFA didn't need to be bad, and indeed would have been better for the game if they had dealt with the initial blowback and didn't lie ("You can target legendaries"). Wakening Essences could've had a significantly higher cost that was reduced over time to prevent over-targeting. Ditto for Echoes.

    It's really hard to be behind the idea of good will and better relations with developers when they haven't done that much to earn things beyond...remove Torghast keys and lighten Torments. Before removing an endless mode. Whoops.

    Yeah, there's gonna be a frenzy of community reaction sometimes in response to small footsteps they interpret as a stampede, but it's worth noting that it's also the onus on the developers to recognize that as a team of initials that are a several-thousandth of the community reacting to them, they're going to be hearing a lot of noise, and maybe that passion is reflective of how much people give a shit about the guns they're sticking to. If the reaction of a small sect devalues the platform of people who do know what they're talking about, and have shown to for a solid 4+ years, they probably weren't planning on listening in the first place.

    I don't think I agree that it's part of the game's DNA; this is an issue that pervades gaming community as a whole. A development team either has to embrace that mentality, or find ways to curtail it. They've chosen the latter.

    I don't see it as a binary problem, where you choose A for A, and B for B. I see it more as a spectrum of 100 scenarios. Ability A isn't just useful in scenario A; it's optimal in scenarios 1-30, adequate in 31-54, sub-par 55-80, and poor value 81-100. Ability B may be optimal in scenarios 25-50, adequate in 71-100, sub-par 51-70, and poor 1-24. What's the call?
    Since top end content is tuned around optimization, and this is confirmed by the powers that be, the fact that there is so much variance remains a problem when the adjustment can't happen. Even then, I think you can break the 100 situations down by what does the "least damage" (which I'd argue again feels less good than just picking what you want) and you still have an "answer," it's just a less satisfying answer. Obviously this was thrown together as an example, I doubt you calculated it out which is fine, but A is better than B here because it has the least poor and the most optimal. This would change, naturally, depending on how "sub-optimal" is sub-optimal, but that's why quantitative over qualitative is important. It's hard to just apply qualitative labels to something, which is why the spreadsheet in question is, yes, flawed.

    The absence of spec swapping and talent adjustments severely hindered group content: I'd argue that drove the change more-so than the community (though that was our argument) - there's an objective engagement issue behind that call, it just happened to align with player demands. In Vanilla, you could tank pretty much anything as 31/5/15, but the power variance increased in BC and WOTLK as trees got deeper, and "off-spec" became a less-and-less viable option. That variance created the need for spec/talent redesign, or we'd have a worse tank drought than we do now.

    We would've taken 120 talent points instead, if we could.
    I'd argue that the inability to swap certain Covenant abilities and losing out on certain dungeon bonuses will hinder certain high-end keys or boss progression. It's not as severe as a full specialization swap, obviously, but if it creates a situation where that's the problem, it means that people are in the same boat where they're ultimately waiting on a combination that benefits them rather than wanting to take a 40-60 minute plunge that might fuck up their key or yield a lot of ill-will and guild drama, potentially people leaving.

    The social component of an MMO is part of the issue here. It's not just the problem we created for ourselves, it's the expectations of being in a social environment in the first place. The consequences of these bonds and the massive fallout of these kinds of problems are too big to ignore. Guilds have died over less.

    Most of the feedback I see on the beta forums comment on the abilities in a vacuum (which is valuable in its own right), but I don't commonly see a point-to-point comparison. Warrior forums are full of people complaining about Banner not being on the back (which it should be) and the aftershock change in PvP, but nobody seems to be comparing them to each other, despite the fact that they share zone-control applications & challenges with their use in PvP.
    There's a pretty good, Blue-created thread regarding it. https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...-survey/616438 Still examined in a vacuum, but at least does a better job on looking at individualized problems across spec.

    I love this particular quote from an MVP, because it's so endemic of the issue:

    "On the other hand, I LOATH the Venthyr. I do not like their characters or story. I do not like their purpose or how they go about what they do. I do not like their rewards. I do not like the party covenant event. I just do not like the Venthyr at all with the exception of the Gothic Architecture in that zone. So while they have an ability I absolutely LOVE I am miserable in every other aspect of the covenant. I don’t feel rewarded, I don’t feel like I have fun with their events, I do not feel like my character would fit there, I just don’t like them nor want to be part of them."

    It's almost like maybe they should decouple this shit from player power. If they want a more complex system that discourages immediate optimization, cool, maybe don't tie it to weekly events people don't enjoy and environments/characters people may fucking hate. ENJOY YOUR NAKED FAERIES, YOU DEATH KNIGHT PIECE OF SHIT. Hell, it's not even about optimization, since some abilities are just flat out more enjoyable to play with.

    That's a byproduct of a mature community, with robust analytical tools tools and a deep understanding of the core gameplay mechanics. We've created an arms-race, born of our collective knowledge; There's no time to explore and pace yourself with friends when the rest of the community is passing you by. AP and Azerite gear exacerbated the issue, for sure, but this has been an issue since Gearscore in WOTLK. Exploration is done on beta and community videos, you've gotta optimize your playtime otherwise.
    Yup, and it's going to evolve much faster than Blizzard thinks. We'll be back to where we were in a week or two after launch, perhaps sooner. The only difference will be that people will feel soft-locked into a situation and will resent it. They'll be deeper in the hole AND will need to go through the same motions. It doesn't gate the ability for players to do this, it worsens it.

    We did this to ourselves. Look at Classic. It's a completely different game than original WoW because the community is so much more educated. High pop servers are a toxic dump because everyone's chasing a 16 year-old meta - social aspect of the game decays when we let combat control the community.
    I'd say Classic is a different beast because we don't just have analytical tools, we also have a vision of the future. People know what specs and classes will be good BEFORE they happen. People know the precise trajectory of the game, so it turns into a rat race to finish content in an under an hour, rather than experiencing new content authentically with a mindset of...doing your best and enjoying it.

    Classic, I think, is also a good example of the problems with this new system, actually. By having more hoops that you need to jump through - world buffs, fucktons of consumables, etc. - it doesn't make it any less possible for people to do these things, it makes it worse, because if some can, they will. The logic 16 years ago surrounding Onyxia's head buff was probably "cool, you can benefit the city when you turn it in! Players probably won't stockpile these and turn it into a mindless fucking conveyer belt - except for on bosses we tuned it for, like Loatheb...which doesn't exist yet, wait what's Loatheb am I having a stroke." NOT ANYMORE, MOTHERFUCKERS.

    Adding more variables that are seen as not a problem, because the community can't possibly gatekeep/optimize them, backfires. Because they will. You made the gate for entry more difficult in response to trying to make it more open.

    I see this as a painful step towards resolving that issue. Power is the most important choice we'll ever have to make - If we're forced to make a combat-related decision, and stick with it, we're forced to become more comfortable with variance. I'm sure there'll still be a meta to chase, but finding players to fit that exact mould will be more difficult.
    I respect the optimism, but dread it. Not for what it is now, but for what it might be in 10.0 or 11.0. Because when this fails, and it will, I am worried they'll keep doubling down. Another system, 3x, 5x, 10x bigger, until it can't possibly be optimized, because god forbid we just make the game about choices that are driven by players selecting what makes sense for a situation based on their skill and judgment. Instead we have to prove we're smarter than them, or something.

    Exclusions are going to happen, but I don't think it'll be any worse than the class exclusion issue we've got currently. The presumed hope is that we're all too lazy or scared to change to any theoretically optimal choice discovered, at the risk the one we've left behind gets bumped up.
    Respectfully, I do think it'll be worse. People are going to gatekeep and early enough in an expansion there will be enough players playing the perceived meta to allow for it. It might peter out towards the end of each patch, once a rhythm has been found, people overgear content, and the less elitist are more comfortable bringing in the stragglers, but let's be honest, by the time 9.1.5 hits this won't be a problem because Covenants will effectively no longer exist, replaced with the Forgemaster's Ballsack, a complicated talent tree attached to each Conduit you have, with that talent tree being re-randomized every time you upgrade that conduit.

    IMO the dread of remorse is only this bad because it's amplified by the absence everywhere else in the game. Flexibility is - always - objectively better, which is why we've watched them dismantle every restriction in our way. There will never be a tangible downside to having a wider variety of options.

    Intangibly, though? I can only speak for myself, but I haven't had to think about this game in years. I genuinely believe it's because my agency carries no weight, and my decisions have no consequences. I'm just another warrior, and instead of adapting my play to suit the challenge in front of me, I just check off a few different boxes.
    And that is the fault of developers. Talents need to be better. Tuning passes need to be made to bring them closer together, which has not been done. More interesting talents need to be given. NEW TALENT ROWS (gasp) need to be brought in with more interesting abilities that require player thought based on the situation, encouraged to shift depending on circumstances. This works sometimes. Nature's Balance vs. Force of Nature if you need some kind of off-taunt is a good example.

    I've said this earlier in this thread, but we're talking a completely different language than the devs are - neither is going to convince the other. Volume isn't going to convince an entire company that their design philosophies are wrong, and we lose credibility when our passion boils down to hashtags and memes. We'll have better luck pointing out specific cracks in the armour, and allow natural discovery and evolution of the narrative.
    I still feel like the onus is on the devs to read the room and learn the language, then. It's true that on an individual basis, the armor cracks can be pointed out. That's why that thread exists and why they created it. But in a macro sense, I can't help but be confused why I should play inspector talking about a door that's been installed improperly and an electrical outlet problem when the house itself is built on the fucking cemetery from Poltergeist and I'm peeling my face off.

    I can't help but theorize, looking at the new PC Gamer, that a big part of not making any significant changes yet is also a marketing feint, since so many materials have already been printed and so much has already invested in selling to the public that is not on board that this is a bold new "your choice!" direction for the game. Maybe they'll back off soon before launch once that phase has passed. We'll see. Until then, though, they seem disconnected from modern gaming. The most popular games now, the ones leaving WoW in the dust of its 2009 peak relevance, are ones that are usually more lobby-based and flexible anyway. This shit ain't Deus Ex, and it can't be so long as it's multiplayer and ostensibly competitive.

  5. #61925
    Well boys... could this be the week we get the 2 week early notice for pre patch??

  6. #61926
    Quote Originally Posted by Vasoka View Post
    Well boys... could this be the week we get the 2 week early notice for pre patch??
    Most likely, yeah. I mean it's gotta be this week or next week unless we're only getting 2 weeks of prepatch.

  7. #61927
    Wish they would release patch date soon.

    I cant wait to play around with

    https://shadowlands.wowhead.com/item...-of-the-past-v

  8. #61928
    Quote Originally Posted by Vasoka View Post
    Well boys... could this be the week we get the 2 week early notice for pre patch??
    I'd honestly be surprised if they didn't.

  9. #61929
    Quote Originally Posted by Great Destiny Man View Post
    I'd honestly be surprised if they didn't.
    Would be a rather short prepatch if they don't.

  10. #61930
    Threads of Fate is very interesting, I'll definitely play with that on my alts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Firedemon View Post
    No. On these forums any updates mean an expansion hint.
    Wrathin comes back? Dragon expansion clearly!
    LK part of a quest? Wotlk 2 clearly!
    Sylvanas working with a death master? Shadowlands clearly!

    At the point we're headed for Wrath of the Shdowlands Dragon Isles Lich and tinkers.

  11. #61931
    Herald of the Titans Valysar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Underworld
    Posts
    2,807
    If prepatch is on September 29, we should have the season's ending warning tomorrow, right ?

  12. #61932
    It will be announced tomorrow or wednesday for sure.
    If not, Shadowlands isnt ready yet.

  13. #61933
    Elemental Lord Lahis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    8,043


    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyrja View Post
    It will be announced tomorrow or wednesday for sure.
    If not, Shadowlands isnt ready yet.
    Doesn't matter if it is not ready.

    They have a release date they can't delay.

  14. #61934
    Field Marshal
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    56
    I don't see a reason for the prepatch to be "delayed" from the 29th. They have a separate branch going for expansion launch so hopefully they have a good enough build for the prepatch branch.

  15. #61935
    The only way it won't drop on the 29th is if it's a 2 week prepatch, which I really doubt they'll do.

    It's possible but not probable.

  16. #61936
    Quote Originally Posted by gunner_recall View Post
    The only way it won't drop on the 29th is if it's a 2 week prepatch, which I really doubt they'll do.

    It's possible but not probable.
    Technical it would be possible, yes, but yeah have to agree thats not really probable as this would make bugfixing for the developer even more hell than it might be in a 4-5 pre patch. Otherwise them splitting on 9.0.1 and 9.0.2 might be the other hint that we will have a regular pre patch as if they we were in a shorter pre patch it wont be needed.

  17. #61937
    Quote Originally Posted by Alga View Post
    Technical it would be possible, yes, but yeah have to agree thats not really probable as this would make bugfixing for the developer even more hell than it might be in a 4-5 pre patch. Otherwise them splitting on 9.0.1 and 9.0.2 might be the other hint that we will have a regular pre patch as if they we were in a shorter pre patch it wont be needed.
    That's the only reason I could even see it happening, just because they are splitting it up into two patches, but that would still be hell for the devs since they have less staffing for each part of the patch. It's less work sure but it's also less people with less time.

    I really don't think they'll only have a 2 week prepatch though.

  18. #61938
    The Insane Chickat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Orgrimmar
    Posts
    17,788
    I guess the Maw isn't going to change huh? Looks like we really only have 4 zones at launch then.

  19. #61939
    Quote Originally Posted by Chickat View Post
    I guess the Maw isn't going to change huh? Looks like we really only have 4 zones at launch then.
    At the very least, people will be farming the Maw to get the socket items for each slot each time they get a new piece.

  20. #61940
    Elemental Lord Lahis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    8,043
    Quote Originally Posted by SamTheBeardedMan View Post
    At the very least, people will be farming the Maw to get the socket items for each slot each time they get a new piece.
    Kinda funny that the only content they had planned for Maw was Torghast keys and once those got removed there was no reason to ho there untill they invented the socket vendor.

Posting Permissions

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