Legion Class/Spec Changes

[Kaver]

I cannot remember.. were the class/spec changes in Legion based on a demand in WOD? When Blizzard decided to turn the Survival Hunter into a melee spec and transform the Combat Rogue into a RNG based Pirate, was this then based on feedback from the players or was it just something that Blizzard decided to do? I genuinely cannot remember if people were asking for this.

[Wuusah]

It was something Blizzard decided on their own to do.
They simply didn’t like how similar each specs were for some classes, so they gave them a distinct identity. Legion did put a big focus on class and spec fantasy. They didn’t want to have “three artifact weapons for rogue/hunter”. They wanted each spec to stand out on its own

[Kaver]

It was something Blizzard decided on their own to do.
They simply didn’t like how similar each specs were for some classes, so they gave them a distinct identity. Legion did put a big focus on class and spec fantasy. They didn’t want to have “three artifact weapons for rogue/hunter”. They wanted each spec to stand out on its own

But was this ever an issue with the player base? I cannot remember a lot of Rogues complaining that the specs felt similar.

[Wuusah]

But was this ever an issue with the player base? I cannot remember a lot of Rogues complaining that the specs felt similar.

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford

It doesn’t matter what the players say they want when it comes to the design of a game. Player feedback is important to fix mistakes and to smooth things out, but the general design direction should come from the game devs. It’s their vision that drives the game forward.

Is it a good vision? Depends on who you ask, I guess. But if Blizzard only did what players ask for then there would be zero innovation

[Kaver]

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford

It doesn’t matter what the players say they want when it comes to the design of a game. Player feedback is important to fix mistakes and to smooth things out, but the general design direction should come from the game devs. It’s their vision that drives the game forward.

Is it a good vision? Depends on who you ask, I guess. But if Blizzard only did what players ask for then there would be zero innovation

The reason why I'm questioning the decision is because Blizzards design must also be based on "happy customers". And although WOD as an overall expansion wasn't very successful for a lot of people, it seemed like most were satisfied with the class design. So I'm just curious why Blizzard decided to change it when it when there was nothing wrong with it. And afterwards some of their very drastic changes like Survival hunter has shown to be widely unpopular.

[ymirsson]

The reason why I'm questioning the decision is because Blizzards design must also be based on "happy customers".

Like most bigger corporations, their decisions are driven by the metric they decide to make the most important. Time spent in game has been very popular in the industry the last years.

[enigma77]

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford

It doesn’t matter what the players say they want when it comes to the design of a game. Player feedback is important to fix mistakes and to smooth things out, but the general design direction should come from the game devs. It’s their vision that drives the game forward.

Is it a good vision? Depends on who you ask, I guess. But if Blizzard only did what players ask for then there would be zero innovation

Legion dumbed down classes, pruned the shit out of them and when the Artifacts were gone so were the plugs used to stuff those holes.

Blizzard shouldn't try to innovate because they're mostly bad at it. Players know best what they want and Blizzard's job should be to simply do what we tell them to do. They have no vision and shouldn't delude themselves to think otherwise. Whenever they try to reinvent the wheel/fix something that wasn't broken most people hate it. People hated the class design of Legion and BFA, people hated Titanforging, people hated Islands and Warfronts, people hated borrowed power in those expansions.

It took Blizzard years to get rid of the things people hated, things they should have never invented in the first place. Blizzard is a studio filled to the brim with people who are extremely out of touch and barely play the game. They don't understand their own game. The players do know better.

The most famous example of this typical Blizzard flaw is of course the statement 'You think you do, but you don't. No, no Blizzard, YOU think you do, but YOU don't. (know what makes the game great) The players do.

[Vaedan]

Legion dumbed down classes, pruned the shit out of them and when the Artifacts were gone so were the plugs used to stuff those holes.

Blizzard shouldn't try to innovate because they're mostly bad at it. Players know best what they want and Blizzard's job should be to simply do what we tell them to do. They have no vision and shouldn't delude themselves to think otherwise. Whenever they try to reinvent the wheel/fix something that wasn't broken most people hate it. People hated the class design of Legion and BFA, people hated Titanforging, people hated Islands and Warfronts, people hated borrowed power in those expansions.

It took Blizzard years to get rid of the things people hated, things they should have never invented in the first place. Blizzard is a studio filled to the brim with people who are extremely out of touch and barely play the game. They don't understand their own game. The players do know better.

The most famous example of this typical Blizzard flaw is of course the statement 'You think you do, but you don't. No, no Blizzard, YOU think you do, but YOU don't. (know what makes the game great)

Following only playerbase would not work well in the end. Most of players are only interested in one or two classes and care little of the rest. These people may have good grasp of their class, but their what they suggest may cause major imbalances across the board.

Blizzard needs to balance 12 classes, 36 specs in total. All those classes/specs work each differently in m+, raids, rbgs or arenas. With such number of specs and different type of endgame content, you have to take active approach in balancing the game. You just can't collect player feedback and hope it will work well. You need to create a system which works well for most and then collect feedback from players what in reality is functional and what's not.

[Ragnarohk]

. Players know best what they want and Blizzard's job should be to simply do what we tell them to do. T

I don't think that's right. Players want everything and nothing. Look at how many threads are created daily complaining about XYZ and then you see many threads saying that XYZ is good.

An example would be balance and homogeneity. Some players want the game to be 100% balanced around Raiding/Mythic/PvP while others want every class to have different utility so that some classes shine where others don't.

Threads about how Titanforging and casino like loot is good to the game because it keeps you playing vs threads saying that limited loot with the ability to get BiS gear is better.

Hell, I've even seen threads against xmog or people wanting to remove wPvP or LFR.

New class? Some want necromancer, some want tinker, some want 4th spec instead

Alliance vs horde? Many want to abolish the notion and be able to play crossfaction. Many opose to this.

Covenants should ve a permanent meaningful choice vs being able to switch on demand to min/max.

Etc.

So unless it's something blatantly obvious, the opinion of the playerbase just cancels itself out.

[Alkizon]

It was something Blizzard decided on their own to do.
They simply didn’t like how similar each specs were for some classes, so they gave them a distinct identity. Legion did put a big focus on class and spec fantasy. They didn’t want to have “three artifact weapons for rogue/hunter”. They wanted each spec to stand out on its own

In general, except for the crossed out part (correction in quote), I agree... in any case, if touch on issue superficially, literally from what they said and did.

Just for reference, principle of weapons' focus won't interfere much in case of hunters...
"in first": if they hadn't removed 3-weapons' equipment systems (main + additional weapon, taking into account two-handed and one-handed), so surv could safely walk hugging own "personal paddle" and remain ranger;
"secondly": even if we exclude this system, solution has been repeatedly proposed very simple = bow/gun/crossbow (surv/mm/bm), since bow is less likely hit with direct physics, but rather magic - for which it's more responsible (which, from point of view of fantasy, much more suits the one who hides, sets traps and behaves as quietly as possible, but stays mobile, change ammo types on the go = smarter/cunning, tries to survive in the wild), and mm, on contrary - loud, confident, direct physical damage... I think there're no special problems about crossbow for bm, right?

But they first spoiled universal, correct and logical system of equipment, which emphasized sufficient battle hybridity (especially! hunters') of most "fighters" and explained magical foundations of remaining ones and then they ripped classes into pieces. So, consequences were not long in coming.

I'd criticize in sufficient detail now both artifacts' basics and organization/design of class halls themselves (especially in terms of imposing style/stylistics and shoved something which can't be shoved into "same walls" due to its different bases/origins, mention with that also very controversial and imo inappropriate "extension" of race-class combinations), their short life and irrelevance within general game design, but hey

[Razion]

I know I sure as heck wanted it. Specs that all look the same and play the same and are only brought for generic class utility isn't what screams style to me. You get your style points for how you make and build your character and spec is the most defining choices you have because it can determine your role in a group for many classes. If you're just a <Insert Class Here> you can be swapped out for any other of the same class and there's nothing special about you and you may as well be a cog in a raid group. Even if you're one of many of your spec in the larger field of your class population, at least you'll be a little bit different. And besides, spec fantasy is cool - it's neat to specialize and have a different looking set of abilities and style of combat from all the other ones you have. It's was especially less pronounced for pure DPS classes like Hunters, Warlocks, and Rogues, which is why I think so many of those specs got so focused on in terms of their spec fantasy pushing them in directions that made them more unique but obviously all specs got their fair share of treatment in Legion to have their specs played up to be more unique and set apart from the other specs. I like specs being unique, love it even, I think all the different flavors add to the game and it would take away from the game if all the specs were so samey. Homogenization can be boring - balanced, but boring. Variety is the spice of life, and specs are cool as hell and worth celebrating. Legion I consider a triumph because of its dedication to spec fantasy to embrace what made you different to the other specs. Yes the base concept of classes is cool - but specs are cooler. It was hard to laude Legion with praise because of all the butthurt of systems people hated at the time, but I'm happy nowadays in retrospect people seem to be giving Legion the praise it should have been getting from the beginning. I don't think Legion would have been nearly as fun if all the Artifact and Spec flavor of the entire expansion hadn't been there. Would people really look back at Legion as fondly if the specs hadn't been so pronounced as a focus? I think it plays a large part into the identity of the expansion - the Artifacts were a big deal and I don't think it's going to be one of those features people just forget about as easily. They certainly made an impression and it certainly wasn't a case of all specs and classes feeling the same. At the very least, I think Legion accomplished very well what it set out to do with Specs as far as trying to make them seem as unique as possible.

[Doffen]

If we go by that logic, why did they change anything from vanilla and up to now? The reason is to have something changed so it feels fresh or different. Blizzard has also answered that spesific question before. They did not like the direction class fantasy was headed in MoP so in WoD they started pruning stuff. They felt classes had lost uniqueness and that the toolkit was to big. What we saw in Legion was continuing what they started in WoD. Artifact Weapon was the system that would help the specs being more unique and to be the "unpruner" as it added stuff for each spec individually.

The thing is that if they were going to keep adding extra buttons every expansion they game would be unplayable in the end. Lets have 40 buttons to push because that is fun. The reality is that rental power is their answer to button bloat. Them changing survival and outlaw was to reinvent the wheel. Some specs will be played less than others. And I think blizzard is fine with that. Melee Survival made the game more fun for a few people, are they less worth than the others? If 100.000 play Hunter, does it matter if 70k play BM, 25k plays MM and 5k plays Survival? Not at all and that was always the case for classes.

Lets take Jimmy Trapper. In MoP he loved Marksman. In MoP his friend Johnny Arrow played Survival. He loved it. He loved it so much he played Survival in WoD too. Jimmy Trapper however wasn't much into MM anymore so he was hoping for Blizzard to do something with the specs in Legion. He did not enjoy BM like his other friend John Beastie and absolutely loathed Survival. He loves the class because it has pets and the fantasy of being a hunter that chase the wilds. So Legion changed Survival into melee. Jimmy Trapper was excited! But his friend Johnny Arrow was not satisfied. Even to this day he hates blizzard for it. But he adapted and played BM ever since. While Jimmy Trapper is now very satisfied with his melee survival spec.

The point of this story is that individuals matters. One persons opinion is not worth more than the other. Mister Trapper don't care that most others hate Survival because for him that made him enjoy the game more.

Legion did change a lot of things. People had left the game for so many expansions and with WoD having that huge decline they left it and started focusing a lot on Legion. Legion actually had an direct and significant increase in MAUs(subs) which they had not seen since early Cataclysm. And it kept that amount for quite a while. Legion was an allround success for Blizzard and thus they did something right for a lot of players. Its not black and white. What you don't understand makes perfect sense for others.

I know I sure as heck wanted it.

Same here. Legion Class, or spec fantasy rather was great and the best overall in the game to me, playing since vanilla. The uniquness it gave for many specs were a winner for me. Absolutely loved the Artifact Weapons!

[Kaver]

I know I sure as heck wanted it. Specs that all look the same and play the same and are only brought for generic class utility isn't what screams style to me. You get your style points for how you make and build your character and spec is the most defining choices you have because it can determine your role in a group for many classes. If you're just a <Insert Class Here> you can be swapped out for any other of the same class and there's nothing special about you and you may as well be a cog in a raid group. Even if you're one of many of your spec in the larger field of your class population, at least you'll be a little bit different. And besides, spec fantasy is cool - it's neat to specialize and have a different looking set of abilities and style of combat from all the other ones you have. It's was especially less pronounced for pure DPS classes like Hunters, Warlocks, and Rogues, which is why I think so many of those specs got so focused on in terms of their spec fantasy pushing them in directions that made them more unique but obviously all specs got their fair share of treatment in Legion to have their specs played up to be more unique and set apart from the other specs. I like specs being unique, love it even, I think all the different flavors add to the game and it would take away from the game if all the specs were so samey. Homogenization can be boring - balanced, but boring. Variety is the spice of life, and specs are cool as hell and worth celebrating. Legion I consider a triumph because of its dedication to spec fantasy to embrace what made you different to the other specs. Yes the base concept of classes is cool - but specs are cooler. It was hard to laude Legion with praise because of all the butthurt of systems people hated at the time, but I'm happy nowadays in retrospect people seem to be giving Legion the praise it should have been getting from the beginning. I don't think Legion would have been nearly as fun if all the Artifact and Spec flavor of the entire expansion hadn't been there. Would people really look back at Legion as fondly if the specs hadn't been so pronounced as a focus? I think it plays a large part into the identity of the expansion - the Artifacts were a big deal and I don't think it's going to be one of those features people just forget about as easily. They certainly made an impression and it certainly wasn't a case of all specs and classes feeling the same. At the very least, I think Legion accomplished very well what it set out to do with Specs as far as trying to make them seem as unique as possible.

The problem with this ideology is that even though Blizzard made the specs of one class more distinct they still brought approximately the same utility. Therefore, the best performing spec off each class would still be chosen. If the goal was to bring a more diverse pool of specs to the raids then that failed. If all the Rogue specs bring the same utility then people will just bring the best performing spec. Changing combat in a pirate themed spec and sub into a ninja themed spec wont change that. And the same can be hunters etc. It doesn't matter if MM and BM is distinct in terms of fantasy if they still bring the same stuff to the table.

- - - Updated - - -

Lets take Jimmy Trapper. In MoP he loved Marksman. In MoP his friend Johnny Arrow played Survival. He loved it. He loved it so much he played Survival in WoD too. Jimmy Sniper however wasn't much into MM anymore so he was hoping for Blizzard to do something with the specs in Legion. He did not enjoy BM like his other friend John Beastie and absolutely loathed Survival. He loves the class because it has pets and the fantasy of being a hunter that chase the wilds. So Legion changed Survival into melee. Jimmy Trapper was excited! But his friend Johnny Arrow was not satisfied. Even to this day he hates blizzard for it. But he adapted and played BM ever since. While Jimmy Trapper is now very satisfied with his melee survival spec.

The point of this story is that individuals matters. One persons opinion is not worth more than the other. Mister Trapper don't care that most others hate Survival because for him that made him enjoy the game more.

The problem for me is that there are thousands times more Johnny Arrows than Jimmy Trappers. And that matters in my world. If changing Survival made much more people sad than happy then it's a bad change in my logic.

[Doffen]

The problem for me is that there are thousands times more Johnny Arrows than Jimmy Trappers. And that matters in my world. If changing Survival made much more people sad than happy then it's a bad change in my logic.

But that wouldn't help. If it was ranged survival and of those 100k players 70k went Survival instead, 25k went BM and 5k went MM, you would have the same "issue".

John Sniper would be one of those 5k MM Hunters then, that would then be an issue in your eyes. MM got the same issue you know. From 40k parses in M Antorus to to 3.1k in M Ny'alotha. That is also a big issue for you then right?

Subtelty Rogue has been less played than Survival the whole expansion. Your other example Outlaw Rogue is a lot more popular than both those. Was that also a bad change then? Is it just your personal opinions on the specs that is the issue for you?