Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ...
5
13
14
15
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by Iain View Post
    Yes. Exactly. Couldn't agree more. 3 specs each is an arbitrary constraint. Maybe there's a hypothetical class that only needs one spec, maybe there's a hypothetical class that needs six specs.
    Less specs will also provide variety in class fantasy, since you won't need to create things like vengence DH.

  2. #282
    Quote Originally Posted by dragonflight10 View Post
    how the fk will people not accept it ? it's not something very big that majority of players won't play, not everyone thinks like you and want new class cus they suck at the game
    This is the dumbest damn statement I have seen for the day. Just cause gamers want new classes or races for a expansion does not mean they suck. Please stop responding with garbage ass statements like this please. And anyways Warlords sucked and so did Shadowlands. That has to tell you something. But then again Shadowlands sucking could have mainly been Blizzs fault cause they were too focused on grabbing ass more then making the game.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Stone Dude View Post
    Do you expect so little of Blizzard, that you don't think they could come up with 3 good specs? Maybe I just think they are more capable than you do.
    Blizzard has shown time and time again that they are not capable or at least showing that they are just stubborn in making things happen. Hence why people are tired of their shit and that is why Blizzard has been bleeding out subscribers for months now.

  3. #283
    Quote Originally Posted by Stone Dude View Post
    They did it for the Demon Hunter and people went "oh well, if they can't think of anything unique, better to just go with 2 specs than to come up with a lackluster 3rd one"

    Now 2 specs is the new standard. They have to put in less effort. Why should they design 3 specs if the community accepts 2 just fine?

    I hate to break it to ya, but 2 specs have always been the standard for new classes.

    - DK : Tank and DPS
    - Monk : Tank, DPS, Heals
    - Demon Hunter : Tank and DPS
    - Evoker : Heals and DPS

    3/4ths or 75% of new classes have been 2 spec.

    1 role : Rogue, Warlock, Hunter, Mage 4/13
    2 roles : Warrior, Priest, Shaman, Deathknight, Demon Hunter, Evoker 6/13
    3 roles : Monk, Druid, and Paladin 3/13

    So this shows us that 31% are 1 role, 46% are 2 role, and 23% are all 3 roles.

    Have you even been playing the same game as everyone else? Every class doesnt need to be a hybrid. Every class doesnt have to have the same roles. Blizzard made the right call by making it heals / dps only. If you hate it so much, maybe Dragonflight isnt for you.

  4. #284
    Quote Originally Posted by LazarusLong View Post
    Less specs will also provide variety in class fantasy, since you won't need to create things like vengence DH.
    Yes! You can even have micro-classes that don't have any spec at all. One-trick ponies that do something really unique and add flavour to the rest of the game. Like for instance a daemon that rides on the shoulder of another player or something.

  5. #285
    Quote Originally Posted by Shinchi Migi View Post
    Blizzard has shown time and time again that they are not capable or at least showing that they are just stubborn in making things happen. Hence why people are tired of their shit and that is why Blizzard has been bleeding out subscribers for months now.
    I always see this. "WoW is bleeding subs and X or Y is the issue". The game is losing subs because its almost a 20 year old game. Nothing more nothing less. No game will ever stay on top forever. Nothing short of WoW 2 could save it at this point and I honestly feel like WoW 2 could never happen. Its behind the times in everything outside of mythic raiding.

    Having Evoker as a 2 spec instead of 3 spec isnt going to make or break Dragonflight. Having 4 new dungeons in the first season instead of 8 isnt going to make or break Dragonflight. No single feature is ever going to make or break an expansion. Not even Garrisons did that.

  6. #286
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonkaden View Post
    I hate to break it to ya, but 2 specs have always been the standard for new classes.

    - DK : Tank and DPS
    - Monk : Tank, DPS, Heals
    - Demon Hunter : Tank and DPS
    - Evoker : Heals and DPS

    3/4ths or 75% of new classes have been 2 spec.

    1 role : Rogue, Warlock, Hunter, Mage 4/13
    2 roles : Warrior, Priest, Shaman, Deathknight, Demon Hunter, Evoker 6/13
    3 roles : Monk, Druid, and Paladin 3/13

    So this shows us that 31% are 1 role, 46% are 2 role, and 23% are all 3 roles.

    Have you even been playing the same game as everyone else? Every class doesnt need to be a hybrid. Every class doesnt have to have the same roles. Blizzard made the right call by making it heals / dps only. If you hate it so much, maybe Dragonflight isnt for you.
    Your point here is incredibly disingenuous.

    By this logic, Hunters, Mages Rogues and Warlocks only have "1 spec" which is just objectively false.

    The only class with 2 specs is DH, Druid has 4 and everything else has 3, except for the new Evoker which will also apparently only have 2.

  7. #287
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    Your point here is incredibly disingenuous.

    By this logic, Hunters, Mages Rogues and Warlocks only have "1 spec" which is just objectively false.

    The only class with 2 specs is DH, Druid has 4 and everything else has 3, except for the new Evoker which will also apparently only have 2.
    Maybe I just assumed roles then lol. Either way, does it really matter if a class has 2 "specs" instead of 3? We don't even know what is going on with the new talent system fully yet. 2 specs going forward might be just fine. You can only play 1. Expac to expac, not every spec for every class is viable either. Id rather have 2 that are viable vs 3 where only really 1 is tbh.
    Last edited by Tonkaden; 2022-05-03 at 02:04 PM.

  8. #288
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonkaden View Post
    What the OP meant was roles, not specs. Healer, DPS, Tank.
    Tey said specs and used DH as the example. They talked about roles in the post yes, but they were specifically referring to the number of specs DH had and saying that 2 is the new norm.

  9. #289
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    Tey said specs and used DH as the example. They talked about roles in the post yes, but they were specifically referring to the number of specs DH had and saying that 2 is the new norm.
    Yea I just assumed. My mistake on that.

  10. #290
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonkaden View Post
    Yea I just assumed. My mistake on that.
    No worries, just making sure we're working from the same page. Honest mistake =)

    OT: I'd rather have 2 specs that make sense than have some spec just shoe horned in there to try and make a third that would likely inevitably dilute the 2 specs they had in their mind. And in that same vein, I'd rather get 2 specs than none at all because they don't want to implement a new class.

  11. #291
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    In the same urn as Vol'Jin
    Posts
    4,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    Tey said specs and used DH as the example. They talked about roles in the post yes, but they were specifically referring to the number of specs DH had and saying that 2 is the new norm.
    Contrary to what the OP is saying, WoW would probably be a significantly better-balanced and more playable game if two specs had always been the norm, at least for classes which only have one or two roles (I think you can justify three for those with three roles). I know that's heresy and you guys are going to burn me for the witch I no doubt am, but I'm going to lay it out in Dragonflight terms.

    Warrior - Prot and Fury should be the specs, Arms should be stuff they both share - the "Class" spec tree.

    Wizard - Ice and Fire should be the specs. Arcane should be abilities both share. Indeed, that's almost how it works, except unnecessarily there's also an Arcane spec.

    Shaman - Resto and Enhance. Elemental again can be a shared pool of abilities. You could make a case to flip Enhance and Elemental, but one way or the other.

    Rogue - Combat (or whatever its called this week) and Sub - i.e. Swashbuckler and Ninja - Assassination is really just "Ninja but with poison instead of bleeds", and should instead supply poisons/utility to both specs as the "Class" spec.

    Hunter - Beast and Marks have the real differentiation - All the traps and utility are pretty much conceptually in Survival anyway, so that becomes the "Class" spec, Marks takes long ranged stuff, Beast takes melee/short-range stuff, and you can spec Beast as either primarily ranged or primarily melee.

    Death Knight - Blood as Tank and Frost as DPS - Personally I'd have it as Frost as Tank and Unholy as DPS, but I think we're too far into DKs being the "self-heal" tank. So Unholy becomes the Class/utility spec, which makes sense because virtually all DKs raise the dead, shoot deathbolts, etc. etc.

    Priest - Discipline and Shadow. Holy becomes the class spec, because again, all Priests use Holy abilities, and Disc offers actually differentiated gameplay from other healers.

    Warlock - Aff and Destro. Demonology has always been awkward as hell, and all Warlocks use pets/summons/etc, so it becomes the Class spec.

    Paladin and Monk can probably justify three specs, though if we "turned back time" on Paladins, the two "real" specs are Holy and Retribution, but you probably don't want to lose any more tank specs. Likewise with Monks, despite me loving Mistweaver (my favourite healer), it'd be easy to make the case that the "real" Monk specs are Windwalker and Brewmaster.

    Druid is a tricky one because at this point I think it can, just barely, justify 4 specs. Again if we "turned back time" to early WoW, though, you could probably make it just "Caster" and "Shapeshifter", probably Resto and Guardian, with Boomkin as an ability to let Resto DPS when solo or on certain fight phases, and Cat similar for Guardians (but also offering stealth - basic Cat would probably be baseline). The Class tree would probably mostly be Balance/Utility stuff.

    Anyway, the ritual evisceration may obviously begin whenever. I do kind of feel like a lot of WoW classes have two "real" specs and one that's much less developed as having its own identity, particularly earlier on in WoW.
    "A youtuber said so."

    "... some wow experts being interviewed..."

    "According to researchers from Wowhead..."

  12. #292
    For me, I don't care if a class has two or more specs, as long as they fulfill different roles. One of the reasons I don't play mage or warlock is that all three of their specs are just Ranged DPS. So I would rather play a shaman or priest, because at least I can go healer every so often or go Melee DPS as a shaman.

    Yet, on the flip side, some players will only ever play the one spec because its the meta, or because preference, or because its easier, whatever reason. So having just two specs is okay for me, again so long as they are different roles. I don't think anyone wants a new class that just has two DPS roles

  13. #293
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    In the same urn as Vol'Jin
    Posts
    4,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Guyviroth View Post
    Yet, on the flip side, some players will only ever play the one spec because its the meta, or because preference, or because its easier, whatever reason. So having just two specs is okay for me, again so long as they are different roles. I don't think anyone wants a new class that just has two DPS roles
    Yeah I very much doubt we'll ever see multiple DPS specs on the same class again, no matter how many classes get added, I don't think Blizzard enjoy trying to diversify them or balance them.
    "A youtuber said so."

    "... some wow experts being interviewed..."

    "According to researchers from Wowhead..."

  14. #294
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyrexia View Post
    It's about time the Tanks never got something, you have enough tank types to choose from, it's about time we got a ranged DPS spec and I'm thankful for Blizz's decision.
    Making it a 4 spec class with a tanking spec, 2 ranged dps specs and a healer spec would have been ideal imo.

    The game does need more ranged dps classes and more tanks. It doesnt really need more healers, but its fine to get some. Giving more people the option to tank dungeons on their class is sorely needed right now. Several of my favorite classes sadly do not have a tank spec, otherwise i would definitely tank dungeons on them.

  15. #295
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurhetemec View Post
    Contrary to what the OP is saying, WoW would probably be a significantly better-balanced and more playable game if two specs had always been the norm, at least for classes which only have one or two roles (I think you can justify three for those with three roles). I know that's heresy and you guys are going to burn me for the witch I no doubt am, but I'm going to lay it out in Dragonflight terms.

    Warrior - Prot and Fury should be the specs, Arms should be stuff they both share - the "Class" spec tree.

    Wizard - Ice and Fire should be the specs. Arcane should be abilities both share. Indeed, that's almost how it works, except unnecessarily there's also an Arcane spec.

    Shaman - Resto and Enhance. Elemental again can be a shared pool of abilities. You could make a case to flip Enhance and Elemental, but one way or the other.

    Rogue - Combat (or whatever its called this week) and Sub - i.e. Swashbuckler and Ninja - Assassination is really just "Ninja but with poison instead of bleeds", and should instead supply poisons/utility to both specs as the "Class" spec.

    Hunter - Beast and Marks have the real differentiation - All the traps and utility are pretty much conceptually in Survival anyway, so that becomes the "Class" spec, Marks takes long ranged stuff, Beast takes melee/short-range stuff, and you can spec Beast as either primarily ranged or primarily melee.

    Death Knight - Blood as Tank and Frost as DPS - Personally I'd have it as Frost as Tank and Unholy as DPS, but I think we're too far into DKs being the "self-heal" tank. So Unholy becomes the Class/utility spec, which makes sense because virtually all DKs raise the dead, shoot deathbolts, etc. etc.

    Priest - Discipline and Shadow. Holy becomes the class spec, because again, all Priests use Holy abilities, and Disc offers actually differentiated gameplay from other healers.

    Warlock - Aff and Destro. Demonology has always been awkward as hell, and all Warlocks use pets/summons/etc, so it becomes the Class spec.

    Paladin and Monk can probably justify three specs, though if we "turned back time" on Paladins, the two "real" specs are Holy and Retribution, but you probably don't want to lose any more tank specs. Likewise with Monks, despite me loving Mistweaver (my favourite healer), it'd be easy to make the case that the "real" Monk specs are Windwalker and Brewmaster.

    Druid is a tricky one because at this point I think it can, just barely, justify 4 specs. Again if we "turned back time" to early WoW, though, you could probably make it just "Caster" and "Shapeshifter", probably Resto and Guardian, with Boomkin as an ability to let Resto DPS when solo or on certain fight phases, and Cat similar for Guardians (but also offering stealth - basic Cat would probably be baseline). The Class tree would probably mostly be Balance/Utility stuff.

    Anyway, the ritual evisceration may obviously begin whenever. I do kind of feel like a lot of WoW classes have two "real" specs and one that's much less developed as having its own identity, particularly earlier on in WoW.
    I don't necessarily disagree with this, but in practice I think it would be difficult to pull off. Having the specs be separated makes it easier for them to just turn dials to balance performance. For example with Shaman, if Enhancement and Elemental were combined as the DPS role and you just played the ranged or melee part whenever you wanted to because everyone had access to the tools of both, it would be challenging for them to dial it in and balance both the class and encounters around that. Also, having them separated gives them more room to really differentiate the play style and game play of each of the specs.

    At this point in the games life cycle and with the way it's designed now (both the open world and dungeon and raid encounters) I don't see this working out.

  16. #296
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurhetemec View Post
    Contrary to what the OP is saying, WoW would probably be a significantly better-balanced and more playable game if two specs had always been the norm, at least for classes which only have one or two roles (I think you can justify three for those with three roles). I know that's heresy and you guys are going to burn me for the witch I no doubt am, but I'm going to lay it out in Dragonflight terms.

    Warrior - Prot and Fury should be the specs, Arms should be stuff they both share - the "Class" spec tree.

    Wizard - Ice and Fire should be the specs. Arcane should be abilities both share. Indeed, that's almost how it works, except unnecessarily there's also an Arcane spec.

    Shaman - Resto and Enhance. Elemental again can be a shared pool of abilities. You could make a case to flip Enhance and Elemental, but one way or the other.

    Rogue - Combat (or whatever its called this week) and Sub - i.e. Swashbuckler and Ninja - Assassination is really just "Ninja but with poison instead of bleeds", and should instead supply poisons/utility to both specs as the "Class" spec.

    Hunter - Beast and Marks have the real differentiation - All the traps and utility are pretty much conceptually in Survival anyway, so that becomes the "Class" spec, Marks takes long ranged stuff, Beast takes melee/short-range stuff, and you can spec Beast as either primarily ranged or primarily melee.

    Death Knight - Blood as Tank and Frost as DPS - Personally I'd have it as Frost as Tank and Unholy as DPS, but I think we're too far into DKs being the "self-heal" tank. So Unholy becomes the Class/utility spec, which makes sense because virtually all DKs raise the dead, shoot deathbolts, etc. etc.

    Priest - Discipline and Shadow. Holy becomes the class spec, because again, all Priests use Holy abilities, and Disc offers actually differentiated gameplay from other healers.

    Warlock - Aff and Destro. Demonology has always been awkward as hell, and all Warlocks use pets/summons/etc, so it becomes the Class spec.

    Paladin and Monk can probably justify three specs, though if we "turned back time" on Paladins, the two "real" specs are Holy and Retribution, but you probably don't want to lose any more tank specs. Likewise with Monks, despite me loving Mistweaver (my favourite healer), it'd be easy to make the case that the "real" Monk specs are Windwalker and Brewmaster.

    Druid is a tricky one because at this point I think it can, just barely, justify 4 specs. Again if we "turned back time" to early WoW, though, you could probably make it just "Caster" and "Shapeshifter", probably Resto and Guardian, with Boomkin as an ability to let Resto DPS when solo or on certain fight phases, and Cat similar for Guardians (but also offering stealth - basic Cat would probably be baseline). The Class tree would probably mostly be Balance/Utility stuff.

    Anyway, the ritual evisceration may obviously begin whenever. I do kind of feel like a lot of WoW classes have two "real" specs and one that's much less developed as having its own identity, particularly earlier on in WoW.
    This is great... I wonder if Blizzard would actually do some of these suggestions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    No fucking way. The worst idea since democracy.

  17. #297
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    In the same urn as Vol'Jin
    Posts
    4,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    At this point in the games life cycle and with the way it's designed now (both the open world and dungeon and raid encounters) I don't see this working out.
    To be honest, it's more of a thought-experiment than a suggestion for the game as it is now.

    I think if they'd done it earlier on, say, in late Vanilla, or at the beginning of TBC, and just said "these two specs are the combat specs, this spec is the utility spec to support both", they could have done a really good job with this approach. However, over the course of TBC, and particularly by the time Wrath started, they were going pretty hard on trying to give all three+ specs an identity and isolated, self-supporting playstyle, and by then it was probably too late. I think the only ones you could really "get away with" cutting down now would likely be Rogue, Warrior, and Mage, maybe Priest and Hunter, but I think those would cause too much shouting.
    "A youtuber said so."

    "... some wow experts being interviewed..."

    "According to researchers from Wowhead..."

  18. #298
    Thought experiments aside, it is extremely valuable to have multiple specs in the same role, meaning DPS for everybody but priests. When a patch comes along overnerfing Fire, you can switch to Frost or Arcane. This happens all the time.

    Specs with only one DPS spec can't do this, so they just suck until they're buffed back up. This is why I would never main a ret paladin or shadow priest.

  19. #299
    Quote Originally Posted by Shinchi Migi View Post
    This is the dumbest damn statement I have seen for the day. Just cause gamers want new classes or races for a expansion does not mean they suck. Please stop responding with garbage ass statements like this please. And anyways Warlords sucked and so did Shadowlands. That has to tell you something. But then again Shadowlands sucking could have mainly been Blizzs fault cause they were too focused on grabbing ass more then making the game.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Blizzard has shown time and time again that they are not capable or at least showing that they are just stubborn in making things happen. Hence why people are tired of their shit and that is why Blizzard has been bleeding out subscribers for months now.
    It's not people wanting a new class i was referring to, it's people who complain about shit all the time 90% of them are bad and entitled

  20. #300
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    23,604
    While I would have preferred a 3rd spec, 2 specs isn't going to stop me from playing a DE. Additionally, I'm very interested in the healing spec.

Posting Permissions

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