Slice and Dice back seems like 3 steps backward

[ro9ue]

Players like that with a limited attention span are the reason that utterly stupid abilities like Convoke the Spirits exist. Everything's gotta explode with a million particles all over your screen or you get bored immediately. You have no appreciation for strategy, cunning, or the understated fantasy of the Rogue class. How base it is to have such a preference for hamfisted stupidity that only satisfies at the visual layer.

I recently watched the 1965 film The Spy Who Came In From The Cold for the first time and was blown away by the awesome plot, great acting and dialogue, the high drama and tension of it all. The whole time I couldn't help but think, why don't they make films like this any more? Why do Michael Bay and JJ Abrams get hundreds of millions of $$ to produce mindless trash?

Unfortunately, audiences are very stupid, and they love big stupid explosions.

It's a goddamn shame though when there are 36 different specs in WoW and yet the devs have so little respect for the average player, they decide all 36 specs need to be "big stupid explosions" specs. Shame on them, and more importantly, shame on all of you.

The specs don't exist in a vacuum. The reality of the situation is that WoW is not that game anymore. Right now to be competitive in M+ for example, you need big bursty explosive shit. People just want the tools to be able to perform in the current meta.

[mitre27]

Ah yes, more cleave and aoe for the tactical single target class

While we're at it lets also give a huge amount of CCs to enhancement shamans and fury warriors, big healing spells for mages, and oh yeah DKs could really use a sprint or burst of speed ability

I assume you mean spec and not class, since we're obviously not the tactical single target class.

There's no reason why you should have to keep switching between rogue specs to do content at a decent rate, they can easily make outlaw do great st damage and godlike cleave/aoe, why can't they do the same for the sin rogue? Your comparison to adding healing to classes without it and more cc is stupid and in no way the same thing.

I'm asking for more equality between the specs on the same class so people play what they enjoy and are not punished heavily for it.

Also, i remember sin rogues 2-3 target cleave being really good, back when our bleeds did a higher portion of our damage.

[shoegazing]

I assume you mean spec and not class, since we're obviously not the tactical single target class.

There's no reason why you should have to keep switching between rogue specs to do content at a decent rate, they can easily make outlaw do great st damage and godlike cleave/aoe, why can't they do the same for the sin rogue? Your comparison to adding healing to classes without it and more cc is stupid and in no way the same thing.

I'm asking for more equality between the specs on the same class so people play what they enjoy and are not punished heavily for it.

Also, i remember sin rogues 2-3 target cleave being really good, back when our bleeds did a higher portion of our damage.

It's ~~so unfair~~ for Affliction to be lacking in single target and burst!

[intenz]

Your input isn't valid since you haven't played the game for the last 5 years and you lack a very basic understanding of how the game works now.

I'm not a fan of the new premed either but you still think combo points work like they did in vanilla. So every input you have on how to fix the class is simply outdated. You're outdated mate. There's a reason why Tech companies don't recruit employees from a retirement home.

He's the only person in this thread making any sense. The game being better back when shoegazing played is statistical fact. Why are you so incapable of acknowledging this? Why do people like you insist on making any excuse for dumbing the game down?

Premeditation is a very good example of the negative design philosophy of modern WoW. You take an iconic ability that gave power to the player to decide whether he wanted to pre-SnD, reach a 5pt finisher quicker, 2pt rupture to the side, all kinds of clever little plays, and replace all of that with a talent that requires no active thought. It's WoW for stupid people.

[Kaver]

The specs don't exist in a vacuum. The reality of the situation is that WoW is not that game anymore. Right now to be competitive in M+ for example, you need big bursty explosive shit. People just want the tools to be able to perform in the current meta.

Shoegazing hasn't played the game since WoD. All his input is completely outdated and he often refers to Vanilla when talking about class design. He doesn't understand that every spec in the game need some kind of cleave/aoe to be viable in M+. He thinks specs should be designed only around pvp. I wouldn't take anything he says too seriously as he has no idea how the game currently works. I don't doubt he was very knowledgeable back in the days but unfortunately he hasn't played the game for 5 years and you can see that from the ignorance of his comments.

- - - Updated - - -

I assume you mean spec and not class, since we're obviously not the tactical single target class.

There's no reason why you should have to keep switching between rogue specs to do content at a decent rate, they can easily make outlaw do great st damage and godlike cleave/aoe, why can't they do the same for the sin rogue? Your comparison to adding healing to classes without it and more cc is stupid and in no way the same thing.

I'm asking for more equality between the specs on the same class so people play what they enjoy and are not punished heavily for it.

Also, i remember sin rogues 2-3 target cleave being really good, back when our bleeds did a higher portion of our damage.

Shoegazing hasn't played the game since WoD. All his input is completely outdated and he often refers to Vanilla when talking about class design. He doesn't understand that every spec in the game need some kind of cleave/aoe to be viable in M+. He thinks specs should be designed only around pvp. I wouldn't take anything he says too seriously as he has no idea how the game currently works. I don't doubt he was very knowledgeable back in the days but unfortunately he hasn't played the game for 5 years and you can see that from the ignorance of his comments.

- - - Updated - - -

The game being better back when shoegazing played is statistical fact. Why are you so incapable of acknowledging this?

No I agree. The problem is that his ideas would break the game right now. For example, he wants Sub to have no cleave or aoe and be only single-target oriented which would completely kill the spec in M+. And I don't want that. But I completely agree with you that class design was better back in MOP. If they completely reverted class design to MoP I would be all for it, however implementing spells like SnD in a vacuum doesn't help right now and even though I want the game to be good in the future I also want it to be good right now. As I say, Shoegazing is outdated. Class designed sucked in BFA and implementing abilities like SnD in a vacuum just made it worse. They need to go all the way otherwise it doesn't make sense.

- - - Updated - - -

"I disagree with you about new Premed without actually disagreeing with you about new Premed"

valuable input

Quoting yet again what you have still failed to address:





It's simple, Kaver. Either state that you agree, state that you disagree and provide reasons why, or put your tail between your legs and walk away. No more waffling.

No it's not simple. Because everything you say is not wrong. But a lot of your input would not work in the game right now because you base it on outdated knowledge. Plus all your posts are either sarcastic or insulting. So how do you expect people to have a productive conversation with you when you're being nothing but disrespectful. It doesn't seem like you want debate anything... you just want to shit on people who try to enjoy the game right now.

I agree with you about premed.

I don't agree with you that SnD is good for the game right now.

I agree that class design in general was better back in MOP/WOD.

I agree with others when they say that not all your ideas are bad but you're a very disrespectful individual that needs to learn how to communicate with other people in a productive way.

I don't agree that Subtlety should be a single-target only spec because it would break it for M+ and like it or not, M+ is a very important and popular part of the game.

Ah yes, more cleave and aoe for the tactical single target class

While we're at it lets also give a huge amount of CCs to enhancement shamans and fury warriors, big healing spells for mages, and oh yeah DKs could really use a sprint or burst of speed ability

This is a pretty good example of your horrible attitude and outdated knowledge. You make a very sarcastic and insulting response to a person who just want Assassination to be more viable in M+. Why do you act like that?

[Steelangel]

Does a mob have a small enough HP that you think you can kill it with Premed --> Ambush --> Evis --> MfD --> Evis? Too bad, you don't have that option because it's more important that some drooling battle pet collector that doesn't even raid LFR can open with Premed --> SnD every time without having to actually press either button. And now you are forced to play the same way in all scenarios.

Ambush as Sub? What?

For 90% of mobs I can shadowstrike -> eviscerate -> loot. Sometimes I have to Shadowstrike -> Eviscerate -> MfD -> Eviscerate -> loot. For an elite, I have to hit Shadow Dance. I don't need SnD for random mobs, and if I do, I can hit the button.

In PvP, if I get stuck in open combat and need SnD, I've probably made a mistake somewhere.

[intenz]

Can we all agree assassination needs better damage tools, right now all we can do is sustained single target dps at a mediocre rate while our cleave and aoe falls behind, it takes so long to build up to our full damage that everything dies in mythic+

I fucking despise outlaw and sub so sin being this shit makes me sad.

Assassination needs a major streamlining overhaul. We need baseline oldschool premed back for every spec, assassination needs something like warlock cataclysm that will apply a venemous wounds bleed to all targets on a 30sec cd or something. It would be nice if it had some more creative poisons for utility also, since apart from garrote silences (that you can't even use half the time in M+ due to chain pulling) it offers less utility than outlaw or sub. And then on top of that it needs another damage buff to abilities.

[Celfydd]

... assassination needs something ... that will apply a venemous wounds bleed to all targets on a 30sec cd or something

That would be ridiculously OP, you'd have unlimited energy on trash packs. If Crimson Tempest were baseline, they got rid of Poison Bomb which is brain dead, and replaced the top tier talents with some talents to be able to transfer your current debuffs/vendetta/etc onto a new target(s) or save them up or something, in order to mitigate the serious problems assassination has with target switching and cleave, it might help.

[mitre27]

It's ~~so unfair~~ for Affliction to be lacking in single target and burst!

Honestly, your argument doesn't make sense, you have literally given no reason why specs shouldn't be closer together on output, with the playstyle being the biggest difference between them.

Then again, someone says you have not played the game since WoD, which makes sense why you have such an outdated outlook on specs.

[shoegazing]

Ambush as Sub? What?

For 90% of mobs I can shadowstrike -> eviscerate -> loot. Sometimes I have to Shadowstrike -> Eviscerate -> MfD -> Eviscerate -> loot. For an elite, I have to hit Shadow Dance. I don't need SnD for random mobs, and if I do, I can hit the button.

In PvP, if I get stuck in open combat and need SnD, I've probably made a mistake somewhere.

I've always refused to refer to ******strike by name. I either refer to it as "droolstrike" or just call it what it should be: ambush.

(It's a common thing in PvP to call abilities by their legacy name... e.g. people still referring to "BoP" even though it is now "Hand of Protection")

Honestly, your argument doesn't make sense, you have literally given no reason why specs shouldn't be closer together on output, with the playstyle being the biggest difference between them.

Then again, someone says you have not played the game since WoD, which makes sense why you have such an outdated outlook on specs.

He's been repeating that lie about me for a while. I leveled 12 characters to 110 in Legion lol. I openly admit that I barely played BFA after Beta, and haven't played Shadowlands after Beta. Despite the fact that I freely admit this, @Kaver still gets it wrong and continues repeating the same lie. Where is the need to lie and exaggerate when I admit that I'm not playing Shadowlands, lol? Why would I waste my time playing a game that I don't enjoy? Currently I'm playing classic and playing TBC private servers. I would like to play retail again, but I won't waste my time on it with the current state of classes which I do not enjoy. I hope to see some changes to retail in future expansions that will make it worth playing again. Shadowlands class design is a small step in the right direction, but it doesn't go nearly far enough.

Also, my argument makes complete sense. How do you have a different playstyle without having different output in different scenarios? This is called having strengths and weaknesses. If every class has the same output in single target, and same output for cleave, and same output for aoe, and same burst potential, then the only differences are 1. the order that you push 1223 instead of 1322, and 2. whether your abilities explode with purple particles for drooling imbeciles, or yellow, or red, or... I.e. these are purely superficial differences. In fact, even on that superficial level, specs have become more same-y, with specs that traditionally have a very understated and, well, Subtle aesthetic getting juiced up new animations and spell FX in order to seem edgier.

Anyway, playstyle is more than 1. what order do I press my buttons to achieve identitical output in all scenarios as everybody else, and 2. what color are my spell fx. If you think about it enough, it's easy to understand. The least you could do is to admit that you don't care if specs have the same playstyle, as long as output is the same. I disagree with that position but then at least you would be being honest and the discussion could move forward.

- - - Updated - - -

Shoegazing hasn't played the game since WoD. All his input is completely outdated and he often refers to Vanilla when talking about class design. He doesn't understand that every spec in the game need some kind of cleave/aoe to be viable in M+. He thinks specs should be designed only around pvp. I wouldn't take anything he says too seriously as he has no idea how the game currently works. I don't doubt he was very knowledgeable back in the days but unfortunately he hasn't played the game for 5 years and you can see that from the ignorance of his comments.

I've already asked you to stop repeating this lie, and I have already warned you that I would ask moderators to intervene if you did not cease and desist.

Since you are unable to argue based on facts and logic, and instead continue to result to argumentum ad hominem, I have now messaged the moderators and asked them to take action.

Let's keep discussion focused on the Rogue class and its design.

This is a pretty good example of your horrible attitude and outdated knowledge. You make a very sarcastic and insulting response to a person who just want Assassination to be more viable in M+. Why do you act like that?

The price for making every spec viable in BGs, and every spec viable in arenas, and every spec viable in raids, and every spec viable while soloing, and every spec viable in torghast, and every spec viable in M+ is that you end up with all specs having the same strengths and weaknesses, the same basic playstyle, and the only differences become aesthetic.

You are free to agree/disagree whether that's a good or bad thing, but the fact that homogeneity results from from balancing every spec for every game mode is totally non-controversial. Blizzard has directly referenced this design problem many, many times over the years.

[Niwes]

Have to say here, that i agree to everything what @Shoedazing said. including his own signature/footer and the quote of Doulas Adams. i do not know that poster. wether personally nor online. but i read his posts and i agree to a lot of what he says (not everything, but a lot). but this is just my personal opinion.

[shoegazing]

I agree that class design in general was better back in MOP/WOD.

Perhaps we have more in common than I thought, then.

Would you then agree, it follows logically that the current M+ cleave/aoe meta based around speed clearing has been an overall detriment to class design and to spec diversity? Perhaps a solution is to have encounter design and affixes that reward CC chains (not just stuns/interrupts) and focus firing priority targets? Perhaps have more affixes available at a given time, so that any spec should have an affix available in which it can thrive, on any given week?

Personally I do not want to see class design continue to get worse (and you agreed with me that it has gotten worse) to continue to compensate for the design deficiencies of one content type.

In Arena, as a counter example, this problem does not exist. There have been plenty of seasons where control/burst comps (RMP) and rot comps (LSD) and zug comps (turbo, walking dead) have all thrived simultaneously. I want to see changes to M+ to support a more varied meta where classes have different strengths and weaknesses and will still be in demand, rather than changes to classes to fit them all into an extremely narrow and flawed M+ meta. If you disagree about this, why? I think "that is ideal, but not doable in the short term, so we need class changes in the short term" is probably the strongest argument available to you, and frankly I don't think that's a very strong argument.

P.S. AoE caps are another indication that Blizzard recognizes the same problem that I do, and agrees it creates problems for class design, and wants to do something about it other than further homogenizing specs. The only issue there is that limiting AoE hasn't been effective enough and they need further design changes around M+ to promote better spec diversity.

[Niwes]

have to add here:

imo the first and foremost fact to make the class mechanics the way they did (simpler), was not that „everybody and his grandma can grokk it“. imo it was just for the devlopers themselfes, for an easier maintaining.

i am a software developer since 20 years and when i look at what they did since Legion with classes, i can clearly see the „cost effective development“ signs. it targets all to a more streamlined, db-entries-provided, static, easy-knobs-maintainable design. they do not want to manipulate classes and design by hand in code and balance all that by testing. they want to support, maintain and balance the game with the least amount of investment possible. by automatic systems with simple and scaling changes in the DB, without touching class code by themselfes. all the changes target directly to support that.

btw: most of their so called QoL changes also directly targets to cost effective devlopment. its QoL for them, not QoL for us. WoW is old. but that old cow still gives a lot of milk. so, how to milk the cow as best as possible ? simple: design the game the way you have to invest as least as possible, while press most profit as possible out of it.

[ro9ue]

Perhaps we have more in common than I thought, then.

Would you then agree, it follows logically that the current M+ cleave/aoe meta based around speed clearing has been an overall detriment to class design and to spec diversity? Perhaps a solution is to have encounter design and affixes that reward CC chains (not just stuns/interrupts) and focus firing priority targets? Perhaps have more affixes available at a given time, so that any spec should have an affix available in which it can thrive, on any given week?

Personally I do not want to see class design continue to get worse (and you agreed with me that it has gotten worse) to continue to compensate for the design deficiencies of one content type.

In Arena, as a counter example, this problem does not exist. There have been plenty of seasons where control/burst comps (RMP) and rot comps (LSD) and zug comps (turbo, walking dead) have all thrived simultaneously. I want to see changes to M+ to support a more varied meta where classes have different strengths and weaknesses and will still be in demand, rather than changes to classes to fit them all into an extremely narrow and flawed M+ meta. If you disagree about this, why? I think "that is ideal, but not doable in the short term, so we need class changes in the short term" is probably the strongest argument available to you, and frankly I don't think that's a very strong argument.

P.S. AoE caps are another indication that Blizzard recognizes the same problem that I do, and agrees it creates problems for class design, and wants to do something about it other than further homogenizing specs. The only issue there is that limiting AoE hasn't been effective enough and they need further design changes around M+ to promote better spec diversity.

This wasn't a reply to me but I agree with that. The issue is, at least from my perspective, that SND doesn't fit in the current game. We can go on about criticizing how the game has changed from something more tactical to something more arcadey and is it worse or better (I think we'd probably be on the same page that it's worse), but there are no signs the game is heading back in that direction. I only see "big explosive shit" full steam ahead. There's no greater indicator of that than the new DH class.

So if we accept the game is heading in that direction, you want your class/spec to compete in the current meta. Imagine playing Assassin Rogue right now with SND, bleeds and set ups and you don't even have a chance to get rolling before a Balance Druid or Marks Hunter is spiking 20k dps with their 1 button Covenant ability.

If they aren't going in the direction of slower, more methodical gameplay, the specs and classes who don't have set ups and maintenance buffs like SND are going to have an advantage. You have to compare specs to specs and analyze them within the current meta. I mean, why doesn't Ret have Inquisition back?

[shoegazing]

have to add here:

imo the first and foremost fact to make the class mechanics the way they did (simpler), was not that „everybody and his grandma can grokk it“. imo it was just for the devlopers themselfes, for an easier maintaining.

i am a software developer since 20 years and when i look at what they did since Legion with classes, i can clearly see the „cost effective development“ signs. it targets all to a more streamlined, db-entries-provided, static, easy-knobs-maintainable design. they do not want to manipulate classes and design by hand in code and balance all that by testing. they want to support, maintain and balance the game with the least amount of investment possible. by automatic systems with simple and scaling changes in the DB, without touching class code by themselfes. all the changes target directly to support that.

btw: most of their so called QoL changes also directly targets to cost effective devlopment. its QoL for them, not QoL for us. WoW is old. but that old cow still gives a lot of milk. so, how to milk the cow as best as possible ? simple: design the game the way you have to invest as least as possible, while press most profit as possible out of it.

I'm also a developer, but... not with 20 years of experience!

I rather read the Legion class changes as a total failure of Product Management. It boggles the mind that a group of professionals could sit around and say "yes, let's take this class that has an audience that self-selected towards it for 14 years because of its specific strengths and weaknesses, its specific playstyle, its specific understated and gritty aesthetic... and now let's throw all of that out the window and design it for a completely different audience instead with a dramatically different playstyle and flashy purple particles everywhere.... this is certain to go over well, the players are going to love it, it won't be controversial at all" :^)

Specifically I think they did a bunch of very general user research about "our players want simpler classes and flashier visual effects and XYZ" and then made the fallacy of concluding "therefore the players who specifically have chosen to play subtlety rogue must also share this preference" when rather they should have appreciated the large differences in the audiences of various specs.

Yes it's true that they did reference things like encounter designers having to specifically code encounter mechanics to not be affected by grounding totem, smokebomb, etc. But once you've written logic to ignore that ability or mechanic in this special case, it should be encapsulated so that for future boss abilities you design it should be as simple as setting `ignoreGrounding = true`

Maybe cost saving has been the intention with Legion class design, but has that been the outcome? It seems they spent massively on it (all the new assets, animations, effects, mechanics that had to be coded, etc) and created further expensive design problems that several expansions later they are still digging their way out of.

And they shifted to the borrowed power system which requires tremendous design and development effort every single expansion, to the point where they recognize they need more changes still to the base classes and don't have the time/money to get that done, because it's all tied up in the new borrowed power. And then they just dumpster all of that borrowed power development effort at the end of the expansion and have to rebuild it all again for the next one. What a hugely inefficient and wasteful approach!

The alternative would have been: not changing class design much at all, saving huge development resources (time is money, after all), and instead focusing all of their efforts on what players actually wanted post-WoD: more content.

Thoughts?

- - - Updated - - -

So if we accept the game is heading in that direction, you want your class/spec to compete in the current meta. Imagine playing Assassin Rogue right now with SND, bleeds and set ups and you don't even have a chance to get rolling before a Balance Druid or Marks Hunter is spiking 20k dps with their 1 button Covenant ability.

/shrug, them's the ropes. I am looking at the long term and I prefer not to make the design of this class even worse than it has already become, just to make us more competitive in the short term. I've stuck with my Rogue since I created it in February 2005, through patches where we dominated and patches where we were just OK or outright bad. When I finally did stop playing retail, it wasn't because of balance problems (Subtlety Rogue has had some very strong arena seasons that I didn't play because I didn't find winning that way to be rewarding) but rather because I don't enjoy the design any longer.

You're free to disagree and say that short term performance is more important to you than the long term integrity of class design.... but I think it's awfully short sighted if you do. I always try to stay above the rat race of "blizzard pls buff my spec the numbers need to be bigger!!!" and focus on improving my play on a personal level. In PvP, even in the worst seasons for XYZ spec, somebody is out there getting gladiator and R1 titles with it instead of giving up and crying for buffs/nerfs or rerolling like a cowardly fotm dog (and gimping their skill development in doing so when they would have developed higher ratings by sticking with it and growing as a player rather than chasing rating). I really, truly have no respect for fotm rerollers in PvP. Even in the most egregiously balanced seasons where people shot up 500 rating by picking DK in s5 or destro lock in BFA, those players are never going to sniff gladiator again and they forever condemned themselves to mediocrity by picking the easy route instead of pushing past their plateaus and developing as a player.

[ro9ue]

/shrug, them's the ropes. I am looking at the long term and I prefer not to make the design of this class even worse than it has already become, just to make us more competitive in the short term. I've stuck with my Rogue since I created it in February 2005, through patches where we dominated and patches where we were just OK or outright bad. When I finally did stop playing retail, it wasn't because of balance problems (Subtlety Rogue has had some very strong arena seasons that I didn't play because I didn't find winning that way to be rewarding) but rather because I don't enjoy the design any longer.

You're free to disagree and say that short term performance is more important to you than the long term integrity of class design.... but I think it's awfully short sighted if you do. I always try to stay above the rat race of "blizzard pls buff my spec the numbers need to be bigger!!!" and focus on improving my play on a personal level. In PvP, even in the worst seasons for XYZ spec, somebody is out there getting gladiator and R1 titles with it instead of giving up and crying for buffs/nerfs.

I've been playing Rogue since 2004. I really don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Questioning the validity of Slice in Dice in the current game, particularly for Assassination, isn't "crying for buffs/make numbers bigger". It's a game design question. Then there are two separate tracks you need to follow logically to understand what I'm saying:

1. Would I prefer the game to be less "gogogogo, blow shit up" and more methodical and tactical again? Yes.
2. Given the game isn't that, and continues trending more in the direction of something like a Wild Spirits/Convoke/DH class design arcadey direction, do I want my class to keep up with the others? Also, yes.

[Steelangel]

I've always refused to refer to ******strike by name. I either refer to it as "droolstrike" or just call it what it should be: ambush.

(It's a common thing in PvP to call abilities by their legacy name... e.g. people still referring to "BoP" even though it is now "Hand of Protection")

I never played sub before I was forced into it in Shadowlands, so I dunno; I've always played Combat (Outlaw).

It's a common thing in WoW (not just PvP) to use legacy shorthand. BoP is well-known, and it just has a new name, not a new effect.

However, Ambush is not Shadowstrike. They are different skills. You do you tho.

[shoegazing]

I've been playing Rogue since 2004. I really don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Questioning the validity of Slice in Dice in the current game, particularly for Assassination, isn't "crying for buffs/make numbers bigger". It's a game design question. Then there are two separate tracks you need to follow logically to understand what I'm saying:

1. Would I prefer the game to be less "gogogogo, blow shit up" and more methodical and tactical again? Yes.
2. Given the game isn't that, and continues trending more in the direction of something like a Wild Spirits/Convoke/DH class design arcadey direction, do I want my class to keep up with the others? Also, yes.

I do understand what you are saying and your point #2 is not very different from someone asking for a buff. The buff you are asking for in this case however is not simply "bigger numbers" however but rather less ramp up time. Your desire for a more arcadey style rogue design, given the current arcadey meta, seems specifically motivated by your desire to compete with other classes is it not?

It seems we agree on what the ideal is for Rogue design, long term. It seems that we both recognize the problem Blizzard faces with designing Rogue in the current one dimensional meta. The divergence is that you're willing to sacrifice good Rogue design in the short term for viability in the current meta, while my stance is, "fuck that, the meta is wrong, OG Rogue design 4ever, I'd rather not play retail at all than sacrifice Rogue design to fit into an obviously flawed and one dimensional meta".

We are battling for the soul of this class. Caving in to the current meta is not the answer and going further down that path is a mistake that will be felt for more expansions to come.

- - - Updated - - -

I never played sub before I was forced into it in Shadowlands

lol, OK

However, Ambush is not Shadowstrike. They are different skills. You do you tho.

The very name Shadowstrike, encapsulates in one single ability, everything that was wrong with the initial vision for Legion Subtlety Rogue.

A spammable 40 yard teleport ambush for drooling imbeciles to roll their face on while perma dancing

I will NEVER show any respect to that name and concept, even if Blizzard somewhat came to their senses and dialed it back since then

[ro9ue]

I do understand what you are saying and your point #2 is not very different from someone asking for a buff. The buff you are asking for in this case however is not simply "bigger numbers" however but rather less ramp up time. Your desire for a more arcadey style rogue design, given the current arcadey meta, seems specifically motivated by your desire to compete with other classes is it not?

It seems we agree on what the ideal is for Rogue design, long term. It seems that we both recognize the problem Blizzard faces with designing Rogue in the current one dimensional meta. The divergence is that you're willing to sacrifice good Rogue design in the short term for viability in the current meta, while my stance is, "fuck that, the meta is wrong, OG Rogue design 4ever, I'd rather not play retail at all than sacrifice Rogue design to fit into an obviously flawed and one dimensional meta".

We are battling for the soul of this class. Caving in to the current meta is not the answer and going further down that path is a mistake that will be felt for more expansions to come.

I just don't see SND as this important keystone to the class as you do.

[shoegazing]

I just don't see SND as this important keystone to the class as you do.

Then you are flat-out wrong. Having a finisher choice between "some damage now" (Evsicerate) vs. "more damage later if I have uptime" (SnD) is essential.