Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
  1. #141
    The best lesson they could take from the success of classic is that it’s fun to play a class over a spec.

    The reason all the spells have been pruned is because they have promoted spec based gameplay and tuned each spec around damage and removed utility and support.

    A return to class based gameplay would provide a reason to unprune. Class based gameplay is more about utility and support over raw damage. I buff you and you buff him and he debuffs the boss to increase melee damage, etc. and in the end the group succeeds because we all support each other.

    But we can still nerf mages.

  2. #142
    PRoblem is current class design revolves all around the rotation itself rather than whole "toolkit" and gameplay. So returning of few more abilities will do nothing to solve this.

  3. #143
    The "no new class" camp feels like a boring conservative political group. Gaming arguments shouldn't boil down to "we have problems, let's solve them first before adding new things".

  4. #144
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    This isn't an either/or scenario. They can create a new class and implement class changes that are pretty far reaching at the same time. MoP is proof of this.
    MoP class philosophy was just the logical evolution of the Cata class philosophy: Make all classes fastpaced with a high skillcap, while giving everybody tons of defensives/movement spells/dps CDs. Which is why those 2 expansions are widely considered the peak of classdesign. If you mean the Lock redesign in MoP, that was something new yes, but the philosophy which said design was based on, was just more of what Cata had done earlier.

    One might argue that said "high speed, high skill" classdesign started in WotLK for certain classes, and that it continued in WoD and Legion (although with defensives/movement spells/Dps CDs being much less abundant), but it was without a doubt at its peak in Cata and MoP.
    Last edited by ThrashMetalFtw; 2019-10-21 at 07:05 PM.
    They're (short for They are) describes a group of people. "They're/They are a nice bunch of guys." Their indicates that something belongs/is related to a group of people. "Their car was all out of fuel." There refers to a location. "Let's set up camp over there." There is also no such thing as "could/should OF". The correct way is: Could/should'VE, or could/should HAVE.
    Holyfury armory

  5. #145
    Quote Originally Posted by deviantcultist View Post
    The "no new class" camp feels like a boring conservative political group.
    Likewise "new class/specs" comp feels like dump liberals.
    Quote Originally Posted by deviantcultist View Post
    Gaming arguments shouldn't boil down to "we have problems, let's solve them first before adding new things".
    let's pour more gasoline on fire with hope it will get extinguished... somehow
    screw rationality

  6. #146
    Herald of the Titans ATZenith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    2,523
    Tbh I’d rather see 4th specs. Done in a way similar to allied races. That way it isn’t a massive undertaking, while at the same time, we get something new

  7. #147
    I'm all for a new class. I like freshness and I'm still looking for an alt.
    M-mom? M-m-mommy, p-please d-d-d-don't kill me. I-I rea-lly am not j-just a lump of cells. Pleasssse Mommy.

  8. #148
    Dreadlord Pigglix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Somewhere Far Far Away
    Posts
    952
    And im still looking for a main! After all those 14 years i am yet to find a class to call it main >w<

Posting Permissions

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