-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
danzibr
While you should take The Glyphstone's advice, I've been wanting to level a lock and am going to use the glyph that makes their demon form tanky and face tank stuff. Sounds super fun.
That's an alternative option...Metamorphosis scales really really weird at low levels, from what I understand, to the point where you can get extremely high uptime on the transformation. Glyph of Demon Hunting itself is mainly a novelty/trap, but it can be fun to goof around with as well.
But for reliable solo-ing, you'll want a Voidwalker with Glyph of Demon Training.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
I thought glyph of demon hunting had been removed?
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Good rule for Warlock changes: If it was fun, it got removed.
Still keep trying to use Curse of Exhaustion and end up using KJC due to it now taking the bar space :smallconfused:
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Antonok
Good rule for Warlock changes: If it was fun, it got removed.
Fixed that for you. The massive rebalancing that happens every major patch and expansion always seems to remove the really fun stuff. Eventually more fun stuff creeps in, eventually, only to be removed at a later date in the future. :smallfrown:
I finally made it up to iLev 510 last night thanks to Timeless Isle frog farming. Looking forward to trying out the level 90 UBRS, but I'm expecting long queues on account of tonight's festivities. Maybe I'll try taming Chimaeron again.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Norren
Fixed that for you. The massive rebalancing that happens every major patch and expansion always seems to remove the really fun stuff. Eventually more fun stuff creeps in, eventually, only to be removed at a later date in the future. :smallfrown:
I finally made it up to iLev 510 last night thanks to Timeless Isle frog farming. Looking forward to trying out the level 90 UBRS, but I'm expecting long queues on account of tonight's festivities. Maybe I'll try taming Chimaeron again.
Because Eye of the beast was fun? Or Symbiosis for anyone but tanks?
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
I liked being able to Rejuve myself as a warlock. Not sure what the druids got out of the deal.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Glyphstone
I liked being able to Rejuve myself as a warlock. Not sure what the druids got out of the deal.
The ability to use your demonic circle.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryuplaneswalker
Because Eye of the beast was fun? Or Symbiosis for anyone but tanks?
Hey, I tanked Deadmines with my pet bear using that spell, it was fun. (It was easier than doing it on a real level 16 bear druid at the time.)
Haven't seen Symbiosis yet. Or is that one already gone?
I finally managed to tame Chimaeron, that was a rough solo tame.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Symbiosis is already gone, and most of the removal were cooldowns (some of which were rolled into other cooldowns) or stupid things that got used maybe once an expansion.
Edit : By the way, we had Stat Squish, Ability Squish and removal of hit and expertise.
Next Expansion..Level Squish, I bet my Shadowmourne on it.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Togath
I thought glyph of demon hunting had been removed?
I learned last night that it has :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Antonok
Good rule for Warlock changes: If it was fun, it got removed.
Still keep trying to use Curse of Exhaustion and end up using KJC due to it now taking the bar space :smallconfused:
I was going to boost a Lock to 90. Now... nope.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Darkmoon Faire! Must collect all the pets.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
danzibr
I learned last night that it has :(
I was going to boost a Lock to 90. Now... nope.
I would not expect it to be...gone for very long, with the new way tanking works "Demon Hunter" as a tanking spec DWing Spellcaster axes, daggers, hammers, swords is something that is entirely foreseeable as a 4th Warlock Spec.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Not a full spec. Maybe a returned glyph, or a Talent choice in a future survivability talent tier.
As someone who's played a Warlock since classic, I'm not that worried about whether or not Warlocks are given tank capabilities. While things like Gladiator Stance and Claws of Shirvallah are leading the way towards talent-based spec hybridism, Druids are the only class who ever actually needed a 4th spec - they've had 4 specs since the beginning, just with 2 of them clumsily mashed together into one talent tree because all the other classes had 3 specs.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
I've only posted about Warlock tanking possibilities a dozen times over the years. Here's my thoughts:
1-Parry as main mitigation stat, though with current stat changes that is probably an obsolete concept.
2-The spec revolves around summoning and sacrificing pets as a form of active mitigation. Temporary shared health (between pet and master), having the pet taunt to take certain hits while the warlock takes other hits, sacrificing pets for certain effects (damage shields, self heals, mitigation effects like dodge/parry/stagger), etc.
3-DW 1h weapons, especially fist weapons. Could they stack two spellpower daggers? Unlikely as such weapons are "main hand" not 1h, and that would give a spell power advantage to the spec that no other spec has. Might be a pain in the butt trying to collect two spellpower weapons especially given how many other classes are fighting over them as well. Unless they do away with spell power altogether, which has been discussed.
4-Spec is not necessarily capped at 1 active pet, and may need to actively manage more than one pet, including positioning in addition to abilities.
5-May include a new pet or two specific to the spec.
PS-I am all in favor of their being 4th spec for everyone that doesn't have them, 4 major glyps for all, and 4 or even 5 columns of talent choices next expansion.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Maybe it's just because I went and played a lot of other MMOs after WoW (particularly with Wildstar and DCUO in mind), but I'd really like to see "pure" DPS classes go the way of the dinosaur (like they have nearly everywhere else).
Of course a "rogue tank" is basically a Brewmaster Monk already, so Pandaria may well have killed that dream.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Pure dps classes have always seemed a bit bland to me as well.
Always a chance they might alter some of the classes later on, like they did with druids and dks.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
I actually... am somewhat opposed to Warlocks getting an official tank spec. Glyph of Demon Hunting was cool 'cause you could sort of tank, but couldn't queue as a tank or do like raid tanking.
My main is a Rogue, and I wouldn't like to see Rogue tanking. Presumably it would be dodge tanking of course (was a thing back in BC).
Anyway. The reason I say this is because I played Rift recently. Every class could do everything. Had rogues healers, tanks, melee dps, ranged dps. Felt so watered down. I'm a Rogue and melee dps is what I do.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Ranged dps rogues remind me...
Anyone else notice that Shuriken Toss seems to have an abnormally high multi-strike chance?
Every time I've opened battle with it, I've hit for three units of damage.
At first I thought it was just my auto attacks... But it seems to happen even when I'm closer than the minimum range for having my autos turn ranged.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guancyto
Maybe it's just because I went and played a lot of other MMOs after WoW (particularly with Wildstar and DCUO in mind), but I'd really like to see "pure" DPS classes go the way of the dinosaur (like they have nearly everywhere else).
Of course a "rogue tank" is basically a Brewmaster Monk already, so Pandaria may well have killed that dream.
Conceptually not really though, I could see the "Rogue" Tanking spec being the "Swashbuckler" spec, Sword Mainhand, Dagger offhand, pirate themed stuff, it somewhat tramples over combat..but I think combat has shifted more from Buckling Swashes to straight two sword style (Think Zuko from Avatar the Last Airbender) fighting. Though really ALL the rogue specs need some tweaking, Death From Above and Shuriken Toss should be..baked into Subtley IMO, have DFA Replace Eviscerate so we get a bit more.."Finishing move" variance in the specs.
@Glyphstone I disagree simply based on the fact that more specs means more choices..and more choices means more fun for everyone and at this point they don't really need more classes persay.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
It took me a while to get used to PvPing with my assassination rogue after the patch. A surprisingly long time, actually. My character was a pitiful punching bag until this weekend, really. For some reason, I just couldn't get the new stuff to click. Now it has clicked, anyway, so I'm feeling a bit better about the whole thing.
Of course, I love most of the new models, so that goes a long a way towards winning me over right there. :smallbiggrin: Shallow, I know.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Is the Whack a Gnoll minigame not scoring any points for anyone else?
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryuplaneswalker
@Glyphstone I disagree simply based on the fact that more specs means more choices..and more choices means more fun for everyone and at this point they don't really need more classes persay.
More choices =/=> more fun.
I would much rather see more specs rather than another class, but I think they're fine as-is. Again, Rift had tooooooooooooooons of choices but was nowhere near as fun a WoW. Lacked the charm. And for most every class, there were only a few good combinations. Rift-done-right could be a lot of fun, though.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Astrella
Is the Whack a Gnoll minigame not scoring any points for anyone else?
It's the same for me, looks to be bugged at the moment.
It's a shame, but the fact that they added a new pet battle daily makes me happy. :smallsmile:
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
danzibr
More choices =/=> more fun.
I would much rather see more specs rather than another class, but I think they're fine as-is. Again, Rift had tooooooooooooooons of choices but was nowhere near as fun a WoW. Lacked the charm. And for most every class, there were only a few good combinations. Rift-done-right could be a lot of fun, though.
If for most every class there were only a few good combinations then there was no real choice, only the illusion of it, much like the Pre-MOP Talent system(Both the 60 point and 30 point of cata) there was zero real choice that impacted your character's progression. If you have real choices in how your character plays you become more invested in that character.
And yes More (real)Choice is more fun, the more possibilities you have to choose from the more interesting the game is, Look at the level 100 Retribution talents, the choice of your talent actively affects how you play your character. ((Seraphim from what I read is currently under powered as a mini-Inquisition it seems))
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
The problem with more choices is in the long run it rarely matters. There will still be at best a handful of "ideal" choices. It doesnt matter if there are a thousand points to put into every conceivable skill choice imaginable, there will always be the best and the rest will be dismissed as not worth it. The early talent point setup is proof of this. Even though there were a large number of combinations you COULD use, and most of them werent that bad, if you didnt use the cookie cutter specs then you "sucked" according to raid guilds and such. "If you're not first, you're LAST!" is the mentality.
And it is a total pipe dream to make it so there are a large number of specs equally viable in the same role. Sure you could make a tank, healer and dps spec all excellent choices for a class, but try setting things up so there are 3-4 equally excellent tank specs for the warrior to pick. It wont work outside of specific gimmicky battles designed for other specs, there will be one thats the best, if only by a narrow amount, and the rest will be dismissed as not worth picking except for those specific fights. I have been playing MMORPGs for over 16 years now, and I have yet to find a game where this isnt the case. Some games do a better job than others, but there will always and forever be a single superior choice, and a selection of second string options.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guancyto
Maybe it's just because I went and played a lot of other MMOs after WoW (particularly with Wildstar and DCUO in mind), but I'd really like to see "pure" DPS classes go the way of the dinosaur (like they have nearly everywhere else).
Of course a "rogue tank" is basically a Brewmaster Monk already, so Pandaria may well have killed that dream.
My preferred solution would be, instead, to remove the notion of 'tanks' and 'healers'. The problem with the 'everyone can heal or tank' notion is that facility is not the reason most players choose not to tank or heal. If you simply compare class population trends to the number of heal/tank slots needed for most content, you'll see that roughly 45% of players are playing a class capable of tanking, and 43% are capable of healing. Yet tanks and healers continue to gate queues for dungeons and raids, to say nothing of premade groups, as any raid leader can attest. The problem is that people don't WANT to perform these roles in the numbers that they're required, and no amount of changes to class mechanics or itemization are going to change that. There's no patch for human behavior.
How do you fix the issue? By getting breaking the trifecta altogether. First, remove spam-able heals. Get rid of them utterly. Instead, give healing classes heals with semi-long cooldowns, usable only to stabilize/rescue party members from imminent death. Turn healers into combat support classes, pitching in to fight and only occasionally using their support powers, instead of being a full-time whack-a-mole bot. From there you can more readily level out player durability, giving classes either the facility to avoid damage or use in-combat self healing for those melee classes. Finally, change the boss aggro AI to make taunt/threat levels non-existent. Let boss pathing and random behavior become the norm. Boss encounters suddenly become more chaotic, less coreographed, and everyone gets to actually PLAY the game, instead of just 2 tanks doing the only demanding job, and leaving the rest of the raid in the position of either filling green bars or depleting the big red bar.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryuplaneswalker
If for most every class there were only a few good combinations then there was no real choice, only the illusion of it, much like the Pre-MOP Talent system(Both the 60 point and 30 point of cata) there was zero real choice that impacted your character's progression. If you have real choices in how your character plays you become more invested in that character.
And yes More (real)Choice is more fun, the more possibilities you have to choose from the more interesting the game is, Look at the level 100 Retribution talents, the choice of your talent actively affects how you play your character. ((Seraphim from what I read is currently under powered as a mini-Inquisition it seems))
I absolutely agree. More *real* choices ==> more fun, but just more choices =/=> more fun. Which was exactly Rift's problem, as I stated, and as you reinforced.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Dunno if anyones tried lvling a DK since the squish, but what the hell did they do to blood dks? Got to 62 and tried tanking a couple dungeons and I don't think I've seen a squisher tank.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Antonok
Dunno if anyones tried lvling a DK since the squish, but what the hell did they do to blood dks? Got to 62 and tried tanking a couple dungeons and I don't think I've seen a squisher tank.
Ooooh that's a pity. I only have two characters: a combat Rogue and a Blood/Unholy DK.
-
Re: World of Warcraft XVII: Warlords Gone Wild
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_Jackal
My preferred solution would be, instead, to remove the notion of 'tanks' and 'healers'. The problem with the 'everyone can heal or tank' notion is that facility is not the reason most players choose not to tank or heal. If you simply compare class population trends to the number of heal/tank slots needed for most content, you'll see that roughly 45% of players are playing a class capable of tanking, and 43% are capable of healing. Yet tanks and healers continue to gate queues for dungeons and raids, to say nothing of premade groups, as any raid leader can attest. The problem is that people don't WANT to perform these roles in the numbers that they're required, and no amount of changes to class mechanics or itemization are going to change that. There's no patch for human behavior.
How do you fix the issue? By getting breaking the trifecta altogether. First, remove spam-able heals. Get rid of them utterly. Instead, give healing classes heals with semi-long cooldowns, usable only to stabilize/rescue party members from imminent death. Turn healers into combat support classes, pitching in to fight and only occasionally using their support powers, instead of being a full-time whack-a-mole bot. From there you can more readily level out player durability, giving classes either the facility to avoid damage or use in-combat self healing for those melee classes. Finally, change the boss aggro AI to make taunt/threat levels non-existent. Let boss pathing and random behavior become the norm. Boss encounters suddenly become more chaotic, less coreographed, and everyone gets to actually PLAY the game, instead of just 2 tanks doing the only demanding job, and leaving the rest of the raid in the position of either filling green bars or depleting the big red bar.
With respect, you basically described the design philosophy behind Guild Wars 2. Which was... not the staggering success Arenanet proclaimed it to be before launch.
In fact, ditching the trifecta basically meant that people found the most tanky of the classes and used that to tank to ensure everyone else had maximum uptime to damage the bosses. Which turned out to be the Necromancer because they basically had an active mitigation ability.
Part of why I'm a healer isn't because I have to be, it's because DPS is something I'm just flat up not interested in. Your system basically turns everyone into a DPS, which means the entire game has to be centered around that. And if there is nothing to differentiate one DPS from another, you get class stacking in a hurry. Why be DPS B when DPS A puts out more damage and neither have any difference in utility? So guess what everyone was playing in GW2 for a while there. Yeup, Necromancer spam. It broke entire encounters, never mind the PvP issues for a while. Sure, it was patched, but the community basically repeated the pattern for about the first year of launch. And it's part of why PvE content was quietly abandoned early on in development in favor of their PvP content.
Ditching the trifecta was an attempt to patch players, and the genre as a whole, and it failed. Hard.
As for MoP, part of why I really enjoyed raiding this expansion was because as a healer, I had something to do in nearly every fight in addition to your over simplification of 'fill up green bars' as did most DPS had more to do than 'deplete red bars' as it were. Particularly in Throne of Thunder where they introduced mechanics which went specifically after roles such as ranged and healers and ignored melee, and vice versa.