| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (28)

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 5:02PM organiclockwork said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As someone who plays a rogue and a priest, I agree entirely.

Why take the Rogue OR the Priest when you can take a Paladin who can fill the roles of both?

Yeah, absolute rubbish.

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
How is the paladin going to be able to do both roles at the same time?

No, people are overreacting a bit. One person may be able to heal in one group, then in the next group tank. I see no problem with that at all.

The only times I see a healer changing spec in mid-instance would be in a raid, and only on certain fights. Loatheb is a good example.

We'll be seeing less switching during instances than people expect, but being able to switch on the fly is going to make questing and dailies much easier for everyone who is not DPS spec.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 5:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Quote: "Already, as a paladin, I could easily switch specs, switch weapons with short cuts on my hotbars, use divine plea to gain back 25% of my mana, and rush right back into combat."

But why is this a bad thing? You've not explained yourself properly. Something like 99% of PVP in WoW takes place in battlegrounds and arenas, and as you note above, switching can't be done there. "rushing right back into combat" Seems to imply that you're in a zone where combat is taking place across a large period of time, such as a battleground.

Quote: "Rogues regenerate energy back at a quick pace, giving them the ability to switch between combat when they feel confident and subtlety when they feel they might lose a fight."

"When they feel they might lose a fight" implies that the rogue is already in combat, and thus, unable to switch.

Quote: "Why take the hunter when you have a paladin who can do protection and retribution and has the gear to outclass the hunter in both cases? Certainly it's bad now, but it can get even worse because now the paladin can fulfill both roles while in the dungeon, when the hunter cannot."

Quite simply, you take the hunter because the paladin can't do both roles at once. Your comment above implies that you would want this highly geared protection paladin to replace the hunter's DPS by switching to retribution, but then who do you have to tank? The actual problem in your example is that the hunter is simply outclassed in gear, but the hunter can do ranged DPS, which is more valuable because ranged DPS is not usually as affected by nasty AOE attacks which have plagued melee DPSers from WoWs release (things like Kel'Thuzad's ice tomb, which is a deadly attack that spreads to anybody within 10yds of the target).

What you should remember is that WoW makes it very difficult to actually attempt any of the content in the game requiring a group because the "world" is split into hundreds of worlds, which are then split in half. With such massive barriers between players wishing to form groups, dual spec is the perfect solution. Not having to run back to do it is just another way Blizzard is securing their place at the top of the MMO food chain. When there's really no detriment to switching spec in the field from a content challenge perspective, why force your players to waste time traveling to do it?

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:21PM jmerriex said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As a Hunter I can tell you that Pallyies can and do out DPS me. You make the assumption that just because the Hunter is not taking damage they can just deal damage ad nauseum which is untrue. Most fights require a lot of movement and even if I am not taking damage I deal little to no damage while moving even with ES and AS.

The problem which you clearly side-steped is that damage in Protection gear is not as bad as it has been and while a Protection geared Pally speced as Ret won't deal 100% of my damage. They WILL deal enough where it won't matter. Currently our guild's MT is a druid and in Cat form he is nearly always at the top of the charts in dps (and we have good dpsers).

I am very curious to see how things unfold with this patch, I think Bliz made a grave mistake in doing this and pure classes (which btw are Hunter, Rogue, Mage and WARLOCK not PRIEST) will see their roles diminished unless. The contradiction bliz is facing is making Hybrid DPS specs on par with equally geared Pure DPS classes. At the moment every Hybrid in my guild has full best in slot off set gear. That leaves us pures out in the cold. But we'll see...
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 5:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
sounds like a good idea gone wrong.

i rmbr hearing about it being proposed and everyone one was joyous, then people (not all)bitched about the lexicon 'catch' that u mentioned. was silly bitching imo. to even be allowed such a thing was very nice of blizz. i really like they way (as a casual player) u had to make a serious decision on what u speced as. (for me 50g was a bit of cash as i was into the uber grind and dailys to make cash)

Additionally, i would argue spec changes shld cost 150g tops to make the penalty really hefty, meaning u have to really consider it seriously, locking your toon in to that roll. which would help prevent the redundancy of pure role chracters.

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 2:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why do people like you feel it's necessary to punish people for having fun while they are playing a game?

If you've setup something that directly allows Player A to have fun at the expense of Player B, then I can see that. But why would you feel it's necessary to punish people just for the sake of punishing?

Why is changing your spec such a big deal? Does locking someone into a specific spec and then punishing them if they change it improve the game in some way?
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"u had to make a serious decision on what u speced as."

This would be fine if the servers weren't split up so horribly as I mentioned in my first post. I recently spent 30 minutes putting together a group for Halls of Lightning because I couldn't find a tank on the entire server that wanted to go. I was spamming LFG, I was sending direct tells to everybody on the server who could possibly tank, and it was absolutely no fun! I bet there were tanks on some of the other dozens of servers that would have wanted to go, but I had no access to them. Dual spec really helps to alleviate that problem.

Here's hoping that Blizzard's next-gen MMO follows EVE's distributed computing model.

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 10:02AM fzzzt said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, there's a flashback to LFGing in EQ.

I think instead of distributed computing model you mean single world model (which I agree with you on). I'd put money on WoW using a distributed computing model for their servers. It's probably more clustering based than distributed computing, but close enough.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:42PM Russell Clarke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Imagine the dole queues full of the single spec guys...

...fighting over green items that have been dumped in the gutters...

...begging for the slightly buckled blue items that nobody wants any more...

...or taking menial jobs just to put dalaran sharp on the table for the kiddies ("chanter LFW, your mats!" - surely it could never happen!)...

...grubbing through the bins outside Stormwind for purples...

It's a sad day for society - well, actually, for the pure classes. Evolve or die, perhaps?

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:44PM organiclockwork said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I never said he'd do both at once, I'm just saying that there's no reason to take a pure DPS or a pure heal class when you can take a class that can switch between DPS or heals as needed for a fight.

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 3:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"I'm just saying that there's no reason to take a pure DPS or a pure heal class when you can take a class that can switch between DPS or heals as needed for a fight."

I don't know about you, but as a rule, I avoid PuGging healers and Tanks. If I choose someone for DPS, I won't be asking them to switch roles. I hand pick the clutch positions and then sprinkle DPS over the rest of my groups. I find it makes life much more enjoyable.

Maybe you won't but I'll still be picking up pure classes.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
John, no class is out-DPSing another class so much right now that they are refused group spots because of it. I believe your DPS issue, if you have one, is not because of a class problem. Also, my original argument stands: If you have that Tank/DPS paladin, and you want him to be DPS, you have to find another tank. Last I checked, the world (of Warcraft) was overflowing with DPS, but not so much with good tanks and healers. Hybrid specs who can spec tank or healer will find themselves more needed in the tank or healer roles most of the time. It's happening now, it will remain so, just without the gold cost to respec.

This dual spec system will not affect invite status for pure vs hybrid classes to groups, it will just make it easier to form groups, and people will look back on the days of WoW without it and think about how hard it was to find that last tank or healer spot, just like they look back on the days of 40 man raiding and think about how insane it was to put together a 40 man raid. Of course, at the time the Burning Crusade was announced, people were crying foul of reducing the raid size to 25 because it wouldn't be as "epic". Those same players were the ones who undoubtedly ended up participating heavily in the most popular raid dungeon of all time, Karazhan, which required only 10 players.

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 8:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Quote: "I never said he'd do both at once, I'm just saying that there's no reason to take a pure DPS or a pure heal class when you can take a class that can switch between DPS or heals as needed for a fight."

Can you really, truthfully see this happening? No, of course not. I've done plenty of Naxx-10 with 2 healers, and you need those two healers _the_whole_time_. I know some people who do it with 3 healers, and maybe on a few fights you would need just two, so that leaves one heal spot in the group which would be "desired" as a hybrid DPS/healer. The only way you could absolutely argue for this type of switching would be if you planned on every run to suffer many, many people disconnecting from your raid and having to be forced to replace them. The dual spec system would then make hybrid classes the most desirable for flexibility in replacing people, but who plans on suffering this kind of thing during a raid?

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 2:59AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Dear Blizzard,

Thanks for opening up a second talent tree, now can I have a third, or are you going to make me wait until you relent your stubbornness with patch 4.0?

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 9:05AM Pylades said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The fatal flaw in your argument seems to be that you don't understand what "in combat" means in World of Warcraft. How do you propose, as a Paladin, to temporarily leave combat? You can't. If you're in a raid, fighting a boss, you are in combat until it dies. Even if you used a Rogue ability like Vanish to escape combat, you would return to combat state as soon as you began the 5-second spec-switch casting time. Entering combat cancels the casting time. So you'd still be in the first talent spec, and all you'd have done is waste your group's time.

All this system does is allow you to switch specs between fights, which is something that progression-focused guilds have been doing since the game was released. Now it just doesn't waste money and time.

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 9:19AM Seraphina Brennan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I find it mildly insulting that you don't believe I'm not familiar with "in combat." I'm doing Naxx 10 and Heroic Obsidian Sanctum, I think I've gotten the crux of "entering combat" and "leaving combat." I know it requires you to be out of combat before you can slip specs, and that requires you to be either nowhere near a battle (not happening) or doing it between battles.

My point is not directly these specific arguments. Perhaps they aren't powerful, but I'm not a power gamer. I play my game, I have my fun, and I don't necessarily attempt to "game the system." However, I'm familiar that people can and do game the system all the time for whatever reason. As you've said, progression guilds switch specs between battles by going back to the trainer and re-speccing... but why? Why is that "good game design?" Why should that be necessary to a challenge and why should the guild display this behavior?

I mean, don't get me wrong, I like the idea of using and having dual-specs to save time (see above), but I don't see the need to be switching in and out at will wherever I am. Requiring a Lexicon of Power was not a burdensome request. Yet, we have this new system, that has the potential to offer a change to the way we commonly play dungeons, do world PvP, etc. Why make that decision?
Reply

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 9:52AM Pylades said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't think it has much to do with Blizzard's design. No matter what Blizzard does, someone is going to try to find an "optimal" way of doing it, so that they can finish it seven minutes before anyone else. Ghostcrawler has already said very clearly that they will not be designing raid content with dual-spec in mind, so there won't be any encounters where your group is expected to switch roles.

My objection is that you seem to be worrying about a situation where a Paladin and/or a Rogue somehow leave combat, switch specs, and re-enter the fight. The mechanic just doesn't work that way. The Paladin cannot spec DPS for Kelthuzad's second phase, and then switch to Protection when the Nerubians spawn in phase three. He just can't.

On the other hand, the Paladin can spec DPS for Sapphiron, and then switch to Protection for Kel'Thuzad. But I fail to see who this disadvantages, because every tanking class can spec for a DPS role, so they're all equal in that regard. Using 10-man Naxx as an example, you need two tanks for most fights. So with or without dual-spec, you're going to have two tanking classes in the raid.
Reply

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 9:53AM Seraphina Brennan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Vanish > Hide somewhere close > Preparation > Switch Specs to Combat > Re-Enter Combat
Reply

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 11:50AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The only real gamebreaking behavior where this is concerned will be among those people that *already* game the system.

More on-topic If the encounters are still tuned for traditional groups, there is nothing stopping a great DPS class from getting into a group. If a ret paladin that happens to be able to spec holy or prot during the raid has better DPS than a hunter, that's not a caveat of dual-speccing. If this is the case, the paladin would get chosen over the hunter *anyhow* unless they were looking for ranged DPS. If the slot is open for DPS and the hunter can do more DPS than this paladin, why take the paladin? If you need DPS, having an available extra healer means very little.
Reply

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 1:18PM Pylades said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Vanish > Hide somewhere close > Preparation > Switch Specs to Combat > Re-Enter Combat"

I'm sorry, but you are mistaken. Inside a raid dungeon, combat pulses. Within one second of the Rogue beginning the 5 second cast to switch specs, he will be in combat again, and the cast will cancel, just like rez spells cancel when the caster enters combat state.
Reply

Featured Stories

Betawatch: May 19 - 25, 2012

Posted on May 25th 2012 8:00PM

Coming soon
Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW