Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
I ask you a question, politely, and you respond like this and accuse ME of toxicity? You suggested balancing changes are good, so i simply asked where you draw the line. There is absolutely no need to be so hostile and aggressive, its only a game.
You are literally making no sense yet still being unable to answer a single question yourself. That's saying something.

If I go through every single comment on this thread with you participating I can see a clear structure that reflects your behaviour, earlier you said something like "(...) This shows how biased and delusional you are.". It's the same thing you are trying to push underneath me; You know exactly where I'm coming from with my toxicity-argument. So much for hostility and aggression.

About 30% of the comments on this thread come from you, obviously it stopped being a game to you. Or it literally became one, actually.


Balancing efforts are good to an extent where the margin in differences is that small that every competitor participating has approximate chances to be equivalently valuable and/or capable to achieve the specific goal, just as everyone else.
Just gonna anticipate the obvious: This absolutely won't include bringing holy priests dps up to par with fury warriors, since you tend to make tactical assumptions.

Things that have to be kept in consideration are environment-specific niche valuability, overall performance, scaling, class- and specc-related pecularities and, of course, a capability-to-complexity dependant benefit, in e.g. if you master the "highest skill capped specc" exceptionally you should on even grounds be slightly better rewarded with higher dps numbers then a specc pulling insane dps that could be played perfectly with attacks bound to monitor adjustment buttons.


The line is drawn where an unsubstantial advantage is given out to inadequately favor a specific specc. Yet even for this you need to consider the exact environment where things take place. Context matters.


And that is just one example. Since you often argue on the very principle of things, which I totally admire as productive and remarkable we totally have to differentiate first what we define as "balance".

And that's where every line-drawing gets interesting - but you already knew that.


Btw, I don't want particular balance changes to classic. Just want to make that clear.