NO to Class Balancing/Changes

Classic Discussion
1 2 3 7 Next
Classes WERE balanced in vanilla.

They're just not balanced how (some) people want them to be.

There were no "Ret Paladins" or other Legion Specific "Class Fantasies". You were simply a Paladin that had points into the Retribution tree -- the majority of your spell toolkit remains unchanged no matter what spec you are.

Hybrid classes typically have heals on top of damaging spells, and this was balanced around their damaging spells having significant drawbacks (higher mana,threat,lower dps,etc.).

Blizzard explicitly states on the different class pages (from the WoW website, circa vanilla wow era) that "Hunters,Rogues,Mages,Locks" are the PURE DPS classes. Priest is the primary healer. Warrior is the primary tank. The "hybrids" are jacks of all trades, with emphasis on healing (as reflected in the itemization for Hybrid "Tier Sets").

This is how Vanilla was designed, it was not some unintended error. See this from their website:

http://web.archive.org/web/20061215232521/http://www.worldofwarcraft.com:80/info/classes/druid/

weakness: animal forms are not as powerful as their counterpart classes

http://web.archive.org/web/20061216080407/http://www.worldofwarcraft.com:80/info/classes/paladin/

weaknesses: heavily dependent on mana for offense and defense abilities, limited abilities with which to draw enemy attacks

http://web.archive.org/web/20061216053653/http://www.worldofwarcraft.com:80/info/classes/shaman/

weaknesses: high dependence on mana pool for offense and survivability


If you want Non-Vanilla Class Balance, go play Legion. You can have your class fantasy of raiding as a Retribution Paladin in all it's glory.

NO to Non-Vanilla Changes/Class Balance. YES to PURE Vanilla!
Agreed, no class changes or balances should be made. As Preach as a nice example of how just one simple change of adding tuant for a pally will change many other things which will completely change Van.
I feel like all your posts are yelling at the wind. Do you ever give your voice a break? You know yelling all day can cause permanent throat damage.
OP: If you admit that balance is subjective, then what makes you think your opinion is the right one? Hiding behind "because that's how it was!" isn't a good enough reason for me as someone who wants to do something that was un-viable in vanilla.
Mfw a warrior tops the dps chart, "pure dps class" indeed.
11/25/2017 04:49 PMPosted by Akaidian
Hiding behind "because that's how it was!" isn't a good enough reason


"VANILLA MEANS VANILLA" --Ion Hazzikostas
11/25/2017 04:49 PMPosted by Akaidian
OP: If you admit that balance is subjective, then what makes you think your opinion is the right one? Hiding behind "because that's how it was!" isn't a good enough reason for me as someone who wants to do something that was un-viable in vanilla.


what was unviable?
my guild had literally at least one of every hybrid spec playing.
we had a feral
we had a balance
we had a ret
we had a prot paladin
we had 2 shadow priests
and we made sure they were included in every fight.
11/25/2017 04:49 PMPosted by Akaidian
OP: If you admit that balance is subjective, then what makes you think your opinion is the right one? Hiding behind "because that's how it was!" isn't a good enough reason for me as someone who wants to do something that was un-viable in vanilla.

Balance isn't subjective. It's just incredibly complicated. What kind of balance? PvP? PvE? 5 mans? Raids? Blues? MC gear? BWL? AQ40? Naxx?

It also depends on the skill level involved. Some classes are just easier to play in certain situations. A good example is feral druids: a good feral druid can do perfectly fine DPS in vanilla. But not everyone is going to be able to handle powershifting or be willing to farm dark runes/night's breath for mana.

While I played, WoW was never balanced. Players were complaining from day 1 until the day I stopped playing. Some of them were right, some of them were just bad at the game, and some of them were flat-out wrong.

One thing is clear: there's no way to significantly change balance in vanilla without massive changes and constant tweaks. And massive changes should be off the table for WoW Classic.
11/25/2017 04:57 PMPosted by Efdaqefawew
Balance isn't subjective.

All of those contributing factors you just laid out as well as the subjective nature of questions around things like "how much should skill affect performance" etc do, indeed, mean balance is subjective.

For me, in light of vanilla design, I'd say balanced is at whatever point you can swap out any spec designed for a role with any other spec because the totality of it's kit is worth it.

Something that enables "bring the player, not the class" within the context of having hybrids.

Healers were basically in this spot already, so I'd ask "why not tanks and DPS?"

While I played, WoW was never balanced. Players were complaining from day 1 until the day I stopped playing. Some of them were right, some of them were just bad at the game, and some of them were flat-out wrong.

While this is true, if that's the way it has to be, I'd prefer my favorite flavor of icecream (since that's all class/spec choices really are... what kinda archetype do you like? same as asking what someone's favorite color is, etc) to be op like other classes that historically occupied the spot, since I don't like those as much from a fantasy perspective.

11/25/2017 04:56 PMPosted by Matcauthon
what was unviable?

Nice of your guild to bring all those gimp specs, but since it's inarguable the raid would have performed better with other classes in those spots (all else equal), your argument falls flat.
By the time 1.12.1 came around, yes, classes were reasonably balanced and everything worked nicely. Specs that didn't work in PVE tended to do fine in PVP (e.g., balance druids, elemental shamans, etc.).
11/25/2017 04:57 PMPosted by Efdaqefawew
Balance isn't subjective.

All of those contributing factors you just laid out as well as the subjective nature of questions around things like "how much should skill affect performance" etc do, indeed, mean balance is subjective.

For me, in light of vanilla design, I'd say balanced is at whatever point you can swap out any spec designed for a role with any other spec because the totality of it's kit is worth it.

Something that enables "bring the player, not the class" within the context of having hybrids.

Healers were basically in this spot already, so I'd ask "why not tanks and DPS?"

While I played, WoW was never balanced. Players were complaining from day 1 until the day I stopped playing. Some of them were right, some of them were just bad at the game, and some of them were flat-out wrong.

While this is true, if that's the way it has to be, I'd prefer my favorite flavor of icecream (since that's all class/spec choices really are... what kinda archetype do you like? same as asking what someone's favorite color is, etc) to be op like other classes that historically occupied the spot, since I don't like those as much from a fantasy perspective.

11/25/2017 04:56 PMPosted by Matcauthon
what was unviable?

Nice of your guild to bring all those gimp specs, but since it's inarguable the raid would have performed better with other classes in those spots (all else equal), your argument falls flat.


You ignorant neglect concept PVP specialized talent tree. Can adapt require intelligent players use understandings about armor statistical allocations then play not easy tree component.
People always say "we had an X in the guild so everything was perfect!"

The reason you only had one (if any) was because they were terrible. You might have had one shadow priest (in a 40 person raid) to bring a debuff or one balance druid (in a 40 person raid) to bring an aura, but any more was just a complete waste because of how poorly they performed in raids. Ele shamans were in an even worse position as having even one would be a waste since they brought nothing a resto shaman didn't bring.
The purists are completely unreasonable about some things but they have an important point about classic authenticity that we should take seriously. While I don't think that adding a calendar, new model toggles, etc. are going to ruin the experience we should evaluate every change no matter how small for those unintended consequences.

The people that want class changes and other crap, however, should be flogged, tarred and feathered. WTH people....

I think there is a compromise here between the purists and non-purists, but that middle ground MUST be much closer to the purists point of view than not.
People always say "we had an X in the guild so everything was perfect!"

The reason you only had one (if any) was because they were terrible. You might have had one shadow priest (in a 40 person raid) to bring a debuff or one balance druid (in a 40 person raid) to bring an aura, but any more was just a complete waste because of how poorly they performed in raids. Ele shamans were in an even worse position as having even one would be a waste since they brought nothing a resto shaman didn't bring.


You say only have 1 like its a bad thing... In an even distribution by spec there will be 8 specs with only one slot in a vanilla 40 man raid... (40/24=1.66666)
All of those contributing factors you just laid out as well as the subjective nature of questions around things like "how much should skill affect performance" etc do, indeed, mean balance is subjective.

This isn't really how I would use the word "subjective."

For me, in light of vanilla design, I'd say balanced is at whatever point you can swap out any spec designed for a role with any other spec because the totality of it's kit is worth it.

Sounds like you want TBC Classic, not Vanilla Classic. Ask for that instead of asking for changes to vanilla. I loved TBC too.
11/25/2017 05:27 PMPosted by Ellilaine
You say only have 1 like its a bad thing... In an even distribution by spec there will be 8 specs with only one slot in a vanilla 40 man raid... (40/24=1.66666)

Sorry, but they were terrible in raids and you know it.
11/25/2017 04:57 PMPosted by Efdaqefawew
Balance isn't subjective.

All of those contributing factors you just laid out as well as the subjective nature of questions around things like "how much should skill affect performance" etc do, indeed, mean balance is subjective.

For me, in light of vanilla design, I'd say balanced is at whatever point you can swap out any spec designed for a role with any other spec because the totality of it's kit is worth it.

Something that enables "bring the player, not the class" within the context of having hybrids.

Healers were basically in this spot already, so I'd ask "why not tanks and DPS?"

While I played, WoW was never balanced. Players were complaining from day 1 until the day I stopped playing. Some of them were right, some of them were just bad at the game, and some of them were flat-out wrong.

While this is true, if that's the way it has to be, I'd prefer my favorite flavor of icecream (since that's all class/spec choices really are... what kinda archetype do you like? same as asking what someone's favorite color is, etc) to be op like other classes that historically occupied the spot, since I don't like those as much from a fantasy perspective.

11/25/2017 04:56 PMPosted by Matcauthon
what was unviable?

Nice of your guild to bring all those gimp specs, but since it's inarguable the raid would have performed better with other classes in those spots (all else equal), your argument falls flat.


Wrong. They each brought there own utility to the table. There own unique buffs.

And frankly if that's the way you want to play it...

In legion every guild should just run 2 bear tanks, priest pally and druid healers, arms warriors and balance druids, affliction locks and frost mages.

No buffs to worry about so just bring the best dps
The unique utility you claim they offered was either not unique (a holy pala would have everything a ret had to offer) or were mathematically not worth the trade-off of another good dps.

Example: 3% crit from oomkin + oomkin's abysmal dps was not worth another competent mage.

As for legion, the classes (minus the few garbage ones) are relatively close, so it's not as important, but you absolutely still see cherry picking of better classes among good guilds.
11/25/2017 05:28 PMPosted by Iosia
11/25/2017 05:27 PMPosted by Ellilaine
You say only have 1 like its a bad thing... In an even distribution by spec there will be 8 specs with only one slot in a vanilla 40 man raid... (40/24=1.66666)

Sorry, but they were terrible in raids and you know it.


I don't know it because we never had any problems that could be attributed to any lack due to their spec. When we crashed and burned on fights we could always point to execution errors, which have nothing to do with spec. We also didn't run into issues with fights lasting too long and healers going OoM because of it. We didn't run afoul of the few enrage timers due to overall lack of DPS, if we ran into them it was because too many people died during the fight.

They weren't some sort of millstone around the raid's neck like the min/max crowd crying for buffs for them want you to believe. They just couldn't stretch their e-peen to match the pure spec's DPS and a certain segment of the population is butt-hurt about that.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum