Dragonflight Alpha/Beta General Discussion

[Santandame]

I do think a large part of why that has happened is the endgame systems. The classes were expanding organically up until MoP. They did the prune in WoD which was unfortunate for some specs but most of them still kept most of their identity and played well. Then in order to integrate artifacts they redesigned everything. And that ended up working as well; imo by the end of Legion almost every spec was in a good or great place and the specs that had issues were few enough that they could have worked on them for the next xpac.
But then came the decision to toss all the artifact design out of the window. To be replace by Azerite traits which were again tossed of the window. To be replaced by conduits which WILL again be tossed off the window.

You know what system worked? Essences. It was an involved system that allowed many layers of choice without completely redefining how classes worked. A system that you could remove and while classes would feel weaker, they'd still largely play the same. But no, we keep getting everything redesigned every xpac. All their effort tuning and adjust over two years reset time and again.

BfA had its issues, I however was a big fan of essences and would welcome them back; same with Artifacts from Legion.

[Nymrohd]

Hard agree. Honestly there are some specs that just feel redundat. Like, do we really need three dual wielding, combo point using, dps rogue?

I am still surprised that they did not squash subtlety and assassin together and add a sniper spec as a third spec.

[SniperCT]

Why are people so obsessed with new classes

No, we don't in respect of this. Assassination and Sub could be rolled into one spec/theme. Outlaw is fine as it is. A third spec for a Rogue could and would ideally be a tank based Rogue centered around evasion, or a Bard as a healer/dps hybrid.

Both like and hate this idea. I would love a tank spec for Rogue, but assassination and sub have very different playstyles. I'm not sure how to reconcile that. Like I prefer the first of the two but know people who love sub. They play differently though.

[Kiria]

Leveling is easy I'm more talking about yeah Reps. Also Campaign progress and AP grind progress.

A better way to get gear for alts by playing your main would be nice too. Like how in 14 you can do dungeons on DPS to get points to buy tank gear for your alt class.

Yes absolutely, FFXIV seems to have nailed the alt friendlyness by eliminating alts altogether and it works extremely well.

[Magenugget]

Im all for the micro classes, it would be very similar to FFXIV then the only thing we are missing is being able to do multiple classes on 1 character

You guys do realise that lowering the barriers of class swapping just forces the perceived meta even more right? We all know that if class X spec Y is the best possible choice to fill a slot, groups will not be satisfied with anything else when people just have to talk to an NPC or hit a button to switch to that spec. Everybody who has played a traditionally off-meta spec knows this.

[Wangming]

No, we don't in respect of this. Assassination and Sub could be rolled into one spec/theme. Outlaw is fine as it is. A third spec for a Rogue could and would ideally be a tank based Rogue centered around evasion, or a Bard as a healer/dps hybrid.

Fire Mage isn't really necessary either as I feel like Destro Warlock fits the same theme and aesthetic. So for Mage instead of Fire, we could have Chronomancer as a healer, or a Blood Mage as a healer.

Yeah definitely. It's like you read my mind. It's either this, or single specs.

[Kiria]

You guys do realise that lowering the barriers of class swapping just forces the perceived meta even more right? We all know that if class X spec Y is the best possible choice to fill a slot, groups will not be satisfied with anything else when people just have to talk to an NPC or hit a button to switch to that spec. Everybody who has played a traditionally off-meta spec knows this.

The playerbase is majority casual and honestly not all of them go meta, this is the great thing about FFXIV if you want to be meta you can if you want to play the class you enjoy then you just play it, it works well in FFXIV why wouldnt it here?

And what's your point exactly? Let hardcore raiders worry about that. Casual fans will happily play around with the exploration content with their preferred class.

Absolutely this, Thank you @Wangming

[Wangming]

You guys do realise that lowering the barriers of class swapping just forces the perceived meta even more right? We all know that if class X spec Y is the best possible choice to fill a slot, groups will not be satisfied with anything else when people just have to talk to an NPC or hit a button to switch to that spec. Everybody who has played a traditionally off-meta spec knows this.

And what's your point exactly? Let hardcore raiders worry about that. Casual fans will happily play around with the exploration content with their preferred class.

[Nymrohd]

BfA had its issues, I however was a big fan of essences and would welcome them back; same with Artifacts from Legion.

Essences are imo the best endgame system they have designed. Very modular, leading to engagement in multiple types of content, with a unique cosmetic reward with legendary essences, easy to expand upon, common to all specs. And so many of them were actually getting used; far more successful than e.g. talents. Most important of all; they did not completely change the way your class played; sure some of them modified it but not to the extent that removing essences made the specs not recognizable like Artifacts and even Azerite traits did.

- - - Updated - - -

Why are people so obsessed with new classes



Both like and hate this idea. I would love a tank spec for Rogue, but assassination and sub have very different playstyles. I'm not sure how to reconcile that. Like I prefer the first of the two but know people who love sub. They play differently though.

And that's why we have a talent system. Both playstyles could exist in one spec and depend on talents that are actually transformative. It has been done before. Think of e.g. WoD Spriest. Talent choice completely changed your playstyle.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

Why are people so obsessed with new classes



Both like and hate this idea. I would love a tank spec for Rogue, but assassination and sub have very different playstyles. I'm not sure how to reconcile that. Like I prefer the first of the two but know people who love sub. They play differently though.

It's the easiest thing in that leak to point to and say "obvious fake." Which leads then to the discussion of "Well if it's true what the hell is Blizz smoking?"

[Fahrad Wagner]

And what's your point exactly? Let hardcore raiders worry about that. Casual fans will happily play around with the exploration content with their preferred class.

Fell off my chair, this so much haha

[Nymrohd]

You guys do realise that lowering the barriers of class swapping just forces the perceived meta even more right? We all know that if class X spec Y is the best possible choice to fill a slot, groups will not be satisfied with anything else when people just have to talk to an NPC or hit a button to switch to that spec. Everybody who has played a traditionally off-meta spec knows this.

The meta only engages people doing M+ above 15 and Mythic raiding, a tiny minority of the playerbase. While some tryhards will talk about it below that level, most people who underperform do not underperform because they are not meta, they underperform because they suck at WoW (and often don't care to get good). And really when M+ was added we saw the most restrictive meta in WoW's history. At least in raiding you often have a third of the specs being top tier; with M+ you often have ONE tank, ONE healer and maybe 4-5 dps (often as little as 2-3) when it comes to high level keys.

So we really should not focus on the meta.

[KayRule]

I thought LivingWorld was just a namespace to group all revamp assets.

No, they're animation names tied to something we don't have in our clients/PTR clients. It's a systems name, not an expansion/category name.

[Santandame]

I understand the ability/spec bloat concern some have.

However, classes like Tinker and Dragonknight both have rich and plentiful themes and ideas that could facilitate new and different playstyles. Dragonknight could give us our true battlemage style spec, on top of a tank spec. It shouldn't be condensed into a one spec class. Dual spec would work.

Tinker has the Mech themed tank role, which would be different to every other tank in both theme and playstyle, a ranged spec which is sorely needed in the game right now, and a potentially interesting and different healer role with the Medic/Alchemist idea.

The issue to me lies with the current pure DPS classes in game; Rogue, Mage, Warlock and to a much lesser extent - Hunter. The first three in particular could all remove or rework one existing spec into a different spec/role, to fix the problem with them feeling samey. Actually, BM could probably even be worked into a tank spec.

[Nymrohd]

Why are people so obsessed with new classes

A huge part of rpgs is choosing an archetype and playing with it. Warcraft has done an amazing job of establishing a truly staggering array of archetypes, especially some that are truly specific and tied to race. And then has made only some of them available. Doubt it is even a majority. People have been trying with transmog and toys to be able to play as archetypes they love for ages. Class skin threads are so popular on most WoW forums, as a possible way for people to be able to experience an archetype.

[KayRule]

I understand the ability/spec bloat concern some have.

However, classes like Tinker and Dragonknight both have rich and plentiful themes and ideas that could facilitate new and different playstyles. Dragonknight could give us our true battlemage style spec, on top of a tank spec. It shouldn't be condensed into a one spec class. Dual spec would work.

Tinker has the Mech themed tank role, which would be different to every other tank in both theme and playstyle, a ranged spec which is sorely needed in the game right now, and a potentially interesting and different healer role with the Medic/Alchemist idea.

The issue to me lies with the current pure DPS classes in game; Rogue, Mage, Warlock and to a much lesser extent - Hunter. The first three in particular could all remove or rework one existing spec into a different spec/role, to fix the problem with them feeling samey.

I think it's more along the lines of this. Do you want ONLY Tinker, with 3/4 specs, tomorrow, then maybe another classes with 3 specs in 6-7 years. Or would you like 4 classes this year with 1 spec. And then maybe 2 classes with 1 spec in 3 years. It opens up the design space so we can get more archetypes and fantasies much faster and in our hands than before. It's kind of like how Allied Races let us get almost double the amount of races over the span of 2 years.

[Wangming]

No, they're animation names tied to something we don't have in our clients/PTR clients. It's a systems name, not an expansion/category name.

So it's the new borrowed power?

[Santandame]

I think it's more along the lines of this. Do you want ONLY Tinker, with 3/4 specs, tomorrow, then maybe another classes with 3 specs in 6-7 years. Or would you like 4 classes this year with 1 spec. And then maybe 2 classes with 1 spec in 3 years. It opens up the design space so we can get more archetypes and fantasies much faster and in our hands than before. It's kind of like how Allied Races let us get almost double the amount of races over the span of 2 years.

I see where you're coming from, I really do.

But I just can't ever understand how single specs would work. I gave my example in regards to Dragonknight earlier but what about those who have always wanted to play a Bard, but are pigeon holed into playing the only Bard spec which is a healer? What if they don't like healing? What if they aren't good at it, or are anxious about healing and therefore don't feel comfortable? At least a second DPS spec would facilitate those kinds of players.

What about our poor Teriz being forced to play a Tinker as DPS when he's always wanted to play as a Mech piloting tank?

I'll definitely agree dual spec is a good idea. I just can't get behind single spec classes from both a balancing perspective and possible player engagement perspective.

The easiest solution if single spec classes were to be a thing would be just to make them pure DPS I guess, but that would just feel underwhelming, wouldn't it?

[TomatoBisque]

I think it's more along the lines of this. Do you want ONLY Tinker, with 3/4 specs, tomorrow, then maybe another classes with 3 specs in 6-7 years. Or would you like 4 classes this year with 1 spec. And then maybe 2 classes with 1 spec in 3 years. It opens up the design space so we can get more archetypes and fantasies much faster and in our hands than before. It's kind of like how Allied Races let us get almost double the amount of races over the span of 2 years.

Allied Races and "mini-classes" are in no way comparable. The former have a lot of reused assets from pre-existing playable races (notably skeletons) and take a lot less work to create

For a mini-class to require the same amount of work reduction it would have to reuse pre-existing assets from another spec. So a Dark Ranger would just be an MM hunter but with different visuals and slight mechanical changes.

[Villager720]

On top of all the other issues with these micro classes (art, balance, leveling, pvp, meta, etc) that others and myself have called out, do we really think they’d add another class with the DK initials? I mean… how many straws are needed to break this camels back?

And at what point do we say : if they’re throwing this much stuff at us (even stuff never heard of before in lore), does that leave anything for the future?
4 new, full classes could literally carry the game into 2032 if released one every other expansion. Why do halfassed 1 spec versions (requiring the same amount of art as a full class) in one giant wave? What’s 12.0 going to have?