People shouldn't accept classes with 2 specs

[Bakis]

I don't think every class needs a spec (no idea how to make a third spec for DHs that differentiates itself from the other two. Bow wielding DHs?), but there is definitely a lack of new classes/specs being added to WoW in general. Guild Wars 2 has added 27 new specs since launch, and FFXIV has 17 combat jobs. FFXIV and GW2 have been running for half the time WoW does, and yet WoW has only added a mere 3 classes. Blizzard definitely is lazy.

I think BLZ got real good at balancing PvE overall lately (excluding M+ that still tends to be most momobility tank = goto).
Adding a new class would be something I would have objected to fiercly pre Shadowlands but I'm fine with it now. I dont see a need to give a new class 3 (I guess 4 specs wont ever come back) specs though. Every new spec just adds to the really really hard task of balancing.
Giving mr Dragling two ranged dps specs would be a bit tricky I think, hard to distinguish them from mage/warlock but I'm sure BLZ thought of giving it 2 healer specs but ruled that out for the same reason.

It will be interesting to see what comes as more news comes and the elephant in the room, will BLZ say "It's a hero class but we wont do the same mistake as with DK's *cough*"

[Ielenia]

People will object to this and say "we have enough melee dps and tank specs".

1. We also have enough ranged dps and healers.

To which the retort would be (and is) "we had zero new ranged classes ever since the game launched".

2. The argument from people is that having more melee dps specs than ranged dps specs leads to having too many melees in a raid, and it gets really cluttered around the boss and raid groups already have to be designed in a way where they don't take too many melees.

Wrong. The argument is from people that rightfully points out that of the three new classes the game has gotten in these 16+ years, 0% of them were ranged, and 100% were melee.

3. You literally lose nothing by getting another spec onto the class. Why would you be against that? It's more content.

This argument of yours is irrelevant, since no one here says classes "shouldn't have more than two specs".

[Stone Dude]

Look, it's clear that the budget went down the window with so many failures and player loss.

Let's be happy we have a new class at all. It says nowhere that they need to have 3 specs.

It says nowhere it needs to have 2 specs either.

It says nowhere it needs to exist at all.

People need to ask for more content, and not be happy with getting less and less. That's how you end up with expansions that only have 4 zones. Why should they give you more than 4 zones if you are all happy with 4 zones? Why put in more work when half-assing it does the trick as well? They take longer and longer to design content, prices go up, and amount of content goes down.

[Bakis]

Again, I already addressed what you said before you said it, and you refuse to refute what I said. You're just repeating something that I've already shown to be nonsensical claims.

Look mr Burner Account only here to cause noise. There is no need for either you or me to refute at this point cos its obvious we have contradictionary opinions in terms of how fitting it is for a dragon to be a tank.
I say no way, you say its perfect. Now, how shall we refute personal opinions?

Edit: "dragon" is what it should be called.

[Stone Dude]

To which the retort would be (and is) "we had zero new ranged classes ever since the game launched".


Wrong. The argument is from people that rightfully points out that of the three new classes the game has gotten in these 16+ years, 0% of them were ranged, and 100% were melee.


This argument of yours is irrelevant, since no one here "does not want more than two specs in a class".

I'm not arguing against the introduction of new ranged dps specs.

I'm saying there is no reason this class couldn't have had a 3rd or even 4th spec and there is no reason why it can't have a melee dps or tank spec.

Saying "we already have enough" is not an argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Look mr Burner Account only here to cause noise. There is no need for either you or me to refute at this point cos its obvious we have contradictionary opinions in terms of how fitting it is for a dragon to be a tank.
I say no way, you say its perfect. Now, how shall we refute personal opinions?

You merely keep ignoring what I said, so just don't post at all.

[Hotmail]

Agreed, but WoW has been in streamlining/skeleton crew/lazy mode for a while now. There is way more egregious stuff going on than new classes only getting 2 specs, and it has everything to do with Blizzard cutting costs to maximize CEO bonuses.

[Teriz]

While I would have liked a third spec, I don't play tanks, and I can't imagine a melee damage spec given that this class is mainly a caster, so the lack of a third spec doesn't really affect me.

That said, I dislike the trend of 2 spec classes.

[wombinator04]

Just a way for them to balance 1 less spec and cut costs, and most of the playerbase accepts it sadly.

[Stone Dude]

While I would have liked a third spec, I don't play tanks, and I can't imagine a melee damage spec given that this class is mainly a caster, so the lack of a third spec doesn't really affect me.

That said, I dislike the trend of 2 spec classes.

That's faulty logic. It's a caster cause it has no melee spec. The shaman is a caster, if you take away the melee dps spec.

- - - Updated - - -

Just a way for them to balance 1 less spec and cut costs, and most of the playerbase accepts it sadly.

Then why introduce any new class at all?

[Flatspriest]

Remember that time mages grew wings and breathed fire while flying?

Don't forget, that time you healed a dungeon or raid with your mage as well.../s

[mwj1995]

more like people shouldn't accept a brand new expansion defining race to be only able to play one class

lazy ass devs

[rhorle]

But it does tell us when they said they were "considering opening up Demon Hunters to new races" they were lying. They're now embracing the idea of more classes, like Dark Ranger or Tinker, at the expense of making them less unique.

Easy on the negativity there. Just because they added a one race two spec class doesn't mean they won't open demon hunters to other classes in the future. Prior to Shadowlands people said the same thing about Death Knights getting more races and look what happened?

[FelPlague]

To which the retort would be (and is) "we had zero new ranged classes ever since the game launched".

For reference, more so for op and others then you but just to support your clause.

13 melee specs
11 ranged specs
6 tank specs (melee)
6 healer specs (1 is half melee, another is half ranged)


Post launch additions- -1 range +1 melee with survival so yes they have funnily enough never added a new ranged spec, and have in fact REMOVED a ranged spec.
+2 melee with DK
+1 melee with monk
+1 melee with DH


then of course 1 healer and 1 ranged coming leading to


13 melee
12 ranged
6 tank specs (which also are in melee)
and 7 healer specs (1 half melee, 1 half ranged)


so even with this new ranged, we still have 1 less ranged then melee, 7 if you consider tanks as melee which you really should as they still flood melee.

- - - Updated - - -

But it does tell us when they said they were "considering opening up Demon Hunters to new races" they were lying. They're now embracing the idea of more classes, like Dark Ranger or Tinker, at the expense of making them less unique.

literally when? when did they say this

[Stone Dude]

For reference, more so for op and others then you but just to support your clause.

13 melee specs
11 ranged specs
6 tank specs (melee)
6 healer specs (1 is half melee, another is half ranged)


Post launch additions- -1 range +1 melee with survival so yes they have funnily enough never added a new ranged spec, and have in fact REMOVED a ranged spec.
+2 melee with DK
+1 melee with monk
+1 melee with DH


then of course 1 healer and 1 ranged coming leading to


13 melee
12 ranged
6 tank specs (which also are in melee)
and 7 healer specs (1 half melee, 1 half ranged)


so even with this new ranged, we still have 1 less ranged then melee, 7 if you consider tanks as melee which you really should as they still flood melee.

- - - Updated - - -


literally when? when did they say this

I already know the numbers.

So? Why do they matter? Why do ranged and melee specs have to be equal? Why can't there be a minor difference?

How is that a reason to not have an additional melee dps and tank spec for this new class?

I already addressed what you said in the OP, because I know all the arguments. I've been hearing them for years. People also said that before the introduction of the Demon Hunter, that whatever the next class is going to be it's probably going to be a ranged dps class, because the last classes were all mainly melee.

And it didn't matter one bit. They didn't matter anymore back then than they do now.

[Supertoster]

Tbh, WoW playerbase should not accept a lot of things. But they have very low bar. WoW players stopped being demanding and because of that Blizz became lazy. And players started to defend blizz laziness with bs arguments like "it will take more time and will be expensive for them".
Customers should not care about this kind of things. Customers vote with their money and have all rights to be demanding and expecting more, not less.
Instead, WoW players excel at inventing new excuses why less specs are good, why reusing of models is fine, why no new animations is okay, why blizz cannot do this or that.

[Dead Moose Fandango]

more like people shouldn't accept a brand new expansion defining race to be only able to play one class

lazy ass devs

This. Won't be be playing that race simply because of that fact.

[Bakis]

You merely keep ignoring what I said, so just don't post at all.

Yeah nothing tanky about a big ass dragon. Especially one created by the literal Aspect of Earth.

Magic... or did Neltharion smack the mountains around untill it turned out how it should be?

-----

Dragon Soul got "empowered by Neltharion's magic"..
Now I'm not saying Dracthyr doesn't carry brute forces power, they should what I do say is that Neltharion was pretty heavy on dat magix stuffz.

-----

And the new class isn't really a big ass dragon:

Yeah nothing tanky about a big ass dragon.

is it mr sunshine?

[Molvonos]

Maybe not mechanics, but aesthetic? Yeah, Mages thing was fire, ice & dragon shit. Evoker is literally synonym for Mage.

Fire, Ice, and Arcane shit.

Dragons were never part of the mage skillset aside from a single spell (and if that's the line we cross, then Mages are equal parts giant ball of ice and magic missiles into the darkness).

[Unholyground]

I already addressed that. Read the post before you comment.


What nonsense. A dragon doesn't make sense as a tank, because magic? Yeah nothing tanky about a big ass dragon. Especially one created by the literal Aspect of Earth.

It's actually more than that he was the Earth Warder which basically means he was a guard of Azeroth. Literally a tank for the planet. I too am a little disappointed we don't have a tank spec it could have been so cool.

[Stone Dude]

It's actually more than that he was the Earth Warder which basically means he was a guard of Azeroth. Literally a tank for the planet. I too am a little disappointed we don't have a tank spec it could have been so cool.

Especially considering you can literally be a black dragon. Who wants to be a black dragon and then heal or shoot blue beams?