Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 3:41:33 PM PST
Subject: Current State |
| |
Your right. I said I would be right back and I wasn't. Not gonna make excuses. My bad.
A follow-up on some topics:
Dual-Wield bonuses through talents
Completely negating the penalty from dual-wielding is something the designers wish to refrain from. This is partly due to not wanting to have cut and paste abilities from one class to another. Yes you have dual-wield;is it going to be the same as a rogues? No. We wish to keep a distinction of how abilities are used by different classes, should they overlap.
It also serves to keep +hit gear valuable in some respect. Varied builds can gain benefits from different quantities of +hit gear. Eliminating the penalty gap completely through talenting trivializes +hit stats on gear. Itemization choices are more robust and makes the class gear dependant as designed.
Slam and the normal swing gap
With Slam needing time to charge up and then triggering cooldowns for normal attacks, it can provide a noticable gap when used singularly, especially when taking damage. The intention of slam is as more of a spammable off-tank ability. If you have a great deal of rage built up and are in an off-tank position, you can get more effect from this ability as a whole. Using it in a main tank or PvP situation is not the optimal situation.
Protection tree woes
This is not forgotten. Regardless of the delay in my response, the collection and transmission of feedback continues. The devs are quite aware that the deeper portion of the tree is not as desirable as the other trees.
The issue comes with time available and the progression of other class balance concerns. Being immersed in the priest changes now and in other talent changes in the future, the class designers do not have immediate time available to met the requests of "another talent review".
However, this does not mean the collection of feedback has stopped or that this class will be forgotten. Now, you may not like me;that's your prerogative. But, that doesn't mean the devs don't like you or aren't paying attention. They notice and agree with many of your concerns. While I don't have more specifics past what I said earlier, it is a desire of the devs to revisit aspects of the warrior class. When that is possible is not at all clear. Consider the fact that the standardized class reviews must be finished up. As other classes are balanced out in there talents and abilities, this will once again affect where this class stands. Warlocks could also be considered in this boat as well, as their talent review was an earlier one.
Consider also that they are keeping in mind how future content is going to affect class performance as well. There are patches to come which will affect class balance in an indirect matter. So, to rebalance after some of these other large projects are established is going to put things in a better place for evaluation.
The current state of affairs is not one of a severely skewed nature. While there are matters to address, they are being prioritized with other changes and additions.
I know you probably hate hearing the word "patience", so I'm not even going to say it.
Oh, wait...
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823509 |
| |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 3:56:03 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State |
| |
Q u o t e:
That is not cool Tseric, and I can't dig that. You already know my thoughts on itemization, and they carry over here. Please relay to dev that at least a significant portion of us share this impression: that dev balances us based on the presumption that we all have 80 dps epic weapons. We don't.
They don't balance the class with that assumption, Height. It is a parameter by which it is measured, but it is not the baseline for judgement. Keep in mind you are playing the most gear dependent class in the game. Nobody at this company thinks that everyone has the sweetest epic gear. That is a perception perpetuated on these forums; Nowhere else.
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823570 |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 5:03:29 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State |
| |
Q u o t e:
Not quite the way I wanted to go about getting a response, but effective nonetheless.
I am primarily concerned that it sets a bad precedent and creates negative sentiment. It essentially makes the process harder on everyone. I have basically failed by providing any response, as now I'm sure a great number of players think that they can stir up a fuss to get what they want. More stress for me, I guess.
Look, I explained to the devs that you think you didn't get a "proper" review. In response to the more than one review at a time: Yes it is too much to ask for at this moment. Frankly, the whole review process has set up expectations from the player base that serves primarily to enflame emotions and distort opinions. What's even more unfortunate is that hindsight doesn't even necessarily grant a clearer view of things. People are more absorbed with what is happening now and what they aren't getting.
If players are going to wait on things with bated breath, then the wait is going to seem that much longer. Let's see how the finalized changes actually play out on the test realms before everyone starts lamenting their existence.
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823706 |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 5:16:33 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State |
| |
Q u o t e:
That is a perception which is hard to refute.
I beg to differ. It is a hard perception to prove true. Consider the "raider/non-raider" debate. The minority has access to all the loot, right? How is everyone then running around with Ashkandi?
Q u o t e:
Gear was the driving force behind weapon speed normalization.
And it was primarily the overpowered blue items that were negatively affected. Real variety in itemization was the result, rather than everyone toting an Arcanite Reaper. Many items were indirectly buffed and some were nerfed and the result was an overall normalization.
Q u o t e:
And it wasn't green Razor Axes of the Monkey that got us the enrage nerf.
You're right. Balance with Mortal Strike was why Enrage was nerfed along with its effects in PvP. This was because the majority of warriors were receiving excess benefit from this.
Q u o t e:
Copied from another one of my posts in the hope you will see it:
"And we are a class defined by its gear. So yes, there will be a new end-all be-all jaw-dropping 2-hander off of C'thun I'm sure. But I would also bet me and every other warrior on my server will get nerfed because of a few warriors on OTHER servers who end up with it! Long before my guild gets to fight C'thun!
How is this fair or reasonable?
It is neither fair nor reasonable. Nor is it accurate. Thunderfury was nerfed because it was considered too powerful. By your logic, another warrior ability should have been nerfed to balance out Thunderfury, yes?
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823736 |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 5:21:46 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State |
| |
Q u o t e:
Tseric,
How the HECK do you call any of the changes "finalized" when we've been nerfed nearly EVERY patch after our "review."
So much for "finalized", eh? Just keep the nerfs coming... at least we expect them now. >.<
--Chindi
I am talking about the priest changes for the PTRs. Just because they are announced and being tested does not mean this is exactly how they are going into the patch. That's all. What conclusion were you drawing there?
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823747 |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 5:03:29 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
Not quite the way I wanted to go about getting a response, but effective nonetheless.
I am primarily concerned that it sets a bad precedent and creates negative sentiment. It essentially makes the process harder on everyone. I have basically failed by providing any response, as now I'm sure a great number of players think that they can stir up a fuss to get what they want. More stress for me, I guess.
Look, I explained to the devs that you think you didn't get a "proper" review. In response to the more than one review at a time: Yes it is too much to ask for at this moment. Frankly, the whole review process has set up expectations from the player base that serves primarily to enflame emotions and distort opinions. What's even more unfortunate is that hindsight doesn't even necessarily grant a clearer view of things. People are more absorbed with what is happening now and what they aren't getting.
If players are going to wait on things with bated breath, then the wait is going to seem that much longer. Let's see how the finalized changes actually play out on the test realms before everyone starts lamenting their existence.
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823706 |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 5:16:33 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
That is a perception which is hard to refute.
I beg to differ. It is a hard perception to prove true. Consider the "raider/non-raider" debate. The minority has access to all the loot, right? How is everyone then running around with Ashkandi?
Q u o t e:
Gear was the driving force behind weapon speed normalization.
And it was primarily the overpowered blue items that were negatively affected. Real variety in itemization was the result, rather than everyone toting an Arcanite Reaper. Many items were indirectly buffed and some were nerfed and the result was an overall normalization.
Q u o t e:
And it wasn't green Razor Axes of the Monkey that got us the enrage nerf.
You're right. Balance with Mortal Strike was why Enrage was nerfed along with its effects in PvP. This was because the majority of warriors were receiving excess benefit from this.
Q u o t e:
Copied from another one of my posts in the hope you will see it:
"And we are a class defined by its gear. So yes, there will be a new end-all be-all jaw-dropping 2-hander off of C'thun I'm sure. But I would also bet me and every other warrior on my server will get nerfed because of a few warriors on OTHER servers who end up with it! Long before my guild gets to fight C'thun!
How is this fair or reasonable?
It is neither fair nor reasonable. Nor is it accurate. Thunderfury was nerfed because it was considered too powerful. By your logic, another warrior ability should have been nerfed to balance out Thunderfury, yes?
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823736 |
Poster: Tseric at 2/23/2006 5:21:46 PM PST
Subject: Re: Current State *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
Tseric,
How the HECK do you call any of the changes "finalized" when we've been nerfed nearly EVERY patch after our "review."
So much for "finalized", eh? Just keep the nerfs coming... at least we expect them now. >.<
--Chindi
I am talking about the priest changes for the PTRs. Just because they are announced and being tested does not mean this is exactly how they are going into the patch. That's all. What conclusion were you drawing there?
Just admiring the shape of your skull...
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-warrior&t=823509&p=#post823747 |
