Every time I get the chance I’m going to scream to the heavens how cancerous the faction war story is. I hate it. I hate it with a passion. The factions are the worst.
1 Like
I don’t think that specific class abilities are the issue. The lack of abilities across all classes is, however.
I think that fundamentally, every class should have:
- An on-demand heal/passive heal.
- An on-demand/passive defensive.
- An on-demand stun/cc
- An on-demand mobility cooldown.
- every class should be capable of both single target and aoe dps (varying on spec).
On top of these base qualities, a spec identity should be built.
That way, everyone has a wider toolkit to make smart & good plays, and differences will be made between people, not between classes.
On average, I’d add up to 2-4 active abilities per class back to them, as well as another 2-4 passives per class. I’d look at base data of each spec’s popularity throughout the game’s history, and if possible, make as close an iteration of them as possible.
1 Like
Every class should be able to do this and that…
Yeah, no, that’s half of the way how we got here…
I liked it when warriors didn’t have a heal at all, for one, but relied on damage mitigation instead. Groups are a thing.
Ofcouurse, this is Unpop. opinions, so, each to their own.
Heirlooms should be flat out removed from the game and instead the lore-masters tabard should give a flat out % XP gain, thus quest rewards are actually useable and feel more rewarding.
There’s also too many bloody levels.
3 Likes
As for a solution to replacing them, the already-existing looms will stay, have their xcp bonus stripped, and be locked in level.
Hard disagree because of transmogging.
3 Likes
for real, not looking like ![:poop:](https://d1bg94bbsh66ji.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/poop.png?v=6" ":poop:")
while levelling through anything before WoD is a huge plus.
unpopular opinion; give the recent bungie/activision split, everyone is asking the burning question of “will blizzard follow”. i dont think they should. its gone to pot over the last 4 months and blizz are in a situation where if they did leave it would take an monolithical amount of effort to regain their players trust and to come away from shoddy business practices. i wouldnt -want- to see the company dissolve/absorbed into activision fully, but that’ll be better than trying to start over with more false promises.
basically cut losses and jump ship. start over with a new name, new IP’s, instead of trying to salvage what cant be salvaged.
Hmm not sure I can agree with this.
I think that as it stands classes are generally too similar, with regards to “everyone has a heal” for example.
I totally agree all dps should be able to perform aoe, single target and cleave, but I think this should be more strong in certain specs than others, so whilst some specs are good in all single target situations, they require certain conditions to maximise on cleave, but another spec has the opposite case.
The degree to which they come within each other in terms of performance shouldn’t be hugely different though. Enough that min maxers will optimise (don’t they already?) But not enough that let’s say an arms warrior (let’s say this would now be a cleave spec) would always perform worse than fury on single target, even when better geared, because obviously gear talks.
So talents would either push you further into the specs niche or round it out.
This kind of approach would also see pure dps specs retain some edge as their three specs allow them to optimise in all forms, whereas say a ret paladin would be nice not optimised for single target.
Might not be popular but I’d like the feeling picking my class had more to it than the spell effects. Yes classes have unique management in areas, but fundamentally they don’t play massively differently. For example enh, dh, warriors all have a builder spender playstyle. The biggest difference is whether I’m whacking people with big weapons doing it, or supplementing this with magic of some form.
Id sooner keep classes feeling distinct in their roles, and additionally have their additional abilities (self heal, mobility…) distinguish them further. Like warriors should get defensive cds, but no self heal. Likewise for rogue. Rogue defensive power was always tied to outright avoiding damage or disabling opponents. Having a self heal just seems lazy. Some classes should have mobility, others heals and others damage reduction. It just means encounters need to be balanced accordingly to ensure all have value somewhere.
At current homogenisation is ideal because blizzard keep reinforcing certain types of content that favours classes with certain traits, so they end up giving those traits to all classes rather than review their content. Picking a particular class for a boon is no bad thing, and it means the class suffers elsewhere (theoretically) it just needs to be balanced properly. For example I liked the idea of a monk tank based upon the idea of mobility, having some hybrid potential (heals, dispels, cc), having mobility should be a monks advantage, not a signal that all tanks there need a similar dashing potential otherwise the difference between classes fades into names of skills and animations.
I mean,tanks and healers aren’t the best example probably given they do actually play quite differently. It’s accepted that certain healers excel at certain content, the same rule should apply for dps. Each has their niche and their additional “utility” and sometimes that is a heal, sometimes it isn’t.
The whole “everyone gets a heal, everyone gets a CC” is the influence of competitive PvP. Maybe that could be addressed by having PvP mode / instances grant certain abilities that fit these generic roles that are only active in these situations like warmode talents, but not generally (and not in dungeons and raids)
No it isn’t.
The fact that everyone had a heal wasn’t a problem, because those heals functioned differently.
Hunter had a passive overtime heal from spirit bond, which was general good for all situations. It was however inadequate for prolonged damage & burst.
In contrast, DK had on-demand heal from both runic power consumption and death strike.
Or that mage healed from ice block.
That’s not homogenization.
That’s great utility. It gives all those specs and classes opportunities to outplay their opponents, using their classes- In the hunters case, you could outplay the opponent by kiting them and healing yourself slowly back- Cool, class fantasy, right there.
For Dk, you’d be able to heal as long as you managed to stay ontop of your opponent. Great, another cool class fantasy (with counterplay potential in both cases).
But lets say you don’t have that heal at all, like in a warriors case right now (save fury). Would you say you have empowered the warrior by removing their ability to sustain themselves? Have you added outplay potential for them?
No, you have given it to others. You have created a rock-paper-scissor class design.
The class design that is killing the game.
I could take any other example I wanted, with any combination or comparison you liked. The point isn’t that every class should be mechanically equal in 1v1.
The point is that taking away choices doesn’t make a class more distinct or unique or make you feel better. It leaves you with frustration and emptiness because you couldn’t do anything because Blizzard had arbitrarily decided that in a situation 134, the only thing you should be able to do is to rise your hands up and not do anything.
Homogenization was never a thing in the history of WoW. It was used as a scapegoat to dumb down the game in hopes of reducing input while maximizing profits- in other words, making the most out of the least.
And ever since that, the class design has been in shambles. For some classes more than others, evidently.
2 Likes
Dark Souls is oriented for PvE, with touches of PvP (only if you chase it). Yeah, it’s not an MMO but reward based on skill is a game thing, not an MMO thing. Mythic raiding is largely obsolete imho, considering the way gearing works. Difficulty for the sake of difficulty is cool, but there’s only frustration upon victory and achievement. That’ll get me talking about WoW’s issues though, and idc about discussing those for a millionth time.
Yak is your friend.
Wouln’t splitting with Activision and/or Vivendi be the first step to regain that trust though? Every online outlet that doesn’t depend on secret handshakes and deals with video game publishers is blaming Activision’s influence on Blizzard for their current state.
A gorillion original Blizzard devs and team members have left the company over the past decade and have reformed as smaller teams or found a place amongst other established companies. These smaller dev teams are the ones who are actually trying their luck with new IPs.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with lesbian relationships in RP.
Now in some cases yes it’s probably because one of them is a guy irl and thinks dating a male character would be “gay”.
But frankly? The majority of male characters are terrible to date or be romantic with. One of my male characters at one stage ended up getting the attention of multiple female characters without any deliberate effort on my part, IC or ooc.
I was more confused than anything do I asked them all why the heck they wanted to date my male character. Unanimously they said that it’s because he actually treated them like people and as friends, rather than hitting on them as soon as possible or even getting pushy.
Still baffled, I wasn’t sure what to make of it. Then I made a female character. Dear god, you’d think the wells in Stormwind had dried up with the sheer thirst thrown her way just for existing and having breasts. Now I wasn’t goaded into ERP or anything but it was a real eye opener, male characters that behave normally around other guys will suddenly behave vastly differently, or treat my character in such a way that it felt slightly… Off.
Then I ended up befriending a few other female characters and we had a fun time. Then it clicked with me, that’s why do many F/F couples exist in RP. Because most male characters you’d meet in an RP hub are terrible dating material. Or in general don’t feel enjoyable to hang around because of how they act around you.
Not to say some female characters weren’t behaving around mine a bit weirdly either, but it was overwhelmingly men. My female character wasn’t even seeking a relationship but that hardly mattered. So that explains why there’s so many F/F couples and why my previous primary male character wound up being asked out a lot by people he only thought of as friends up to that point. (And no I didn’t go along with any of them, IC he just felt awkward as he saw them each as good friends but he didn’t really fancy any of them).
4 Likes
Why date when you could spend years in a hole and start talking economics with a flightless bird.
Bet you feel silly now, don’t you.
7 Likes
I’m not sure if this is actually an unpopular opinion, as far as I’m know the problem is usually the immense frequency or tasteless execution rather than the core concept. But, of course, this goes for most if not all relationship RP.
With a few ichor-spewing exceptions, this is why I like Forsaken RP.
Sexual orientation: dead
8 Likes
Uninvolved in ERP scandals master race represent
1 Like
Understandable. I just always felt that there was a bit of sourness towards F/F couples in my experience, even those done perfectly well.
Well back on my old RP server there was this Troll… ![:eyes:](https://d1bg94bbsh66ji.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/eyes.png?v=6" ":eyes:")
1 Like
On the subject of relationships: Is it possible for Undead folk to seek out companionship?
No I am not talking about anything serious. More like… You know, hanging out, go for dinner, have romantic walks along the beach.
The most intimate action that I can think of that wouldn’t raise too many eyebrows is a fully-dressed zombie cuddling with another fully-dressed zombie.
What do you folks think?