Holy Paladin Feedback

Battle for Azeroth Items and Classes
Prev 1 18 19 20 21 Next
07/01/2018 06:44 PMPosted by Zenetta
Scale to the exact same average value at what crit rating? They scale differently


Any crit rating and no.


Current Holy Shock has a flat 30% crit rating added to it, so it doesn't scale with crit like other spells. Assume you balance both old and new HS to have the same average value at 25% crit. That's 150% base SP for old HS (150 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.3 ) = 232.5% SP), and 93% base SP for new HS (93 * 2 * 1.25 = 232.5% SP). If you look at the same abilities at 20% crit, you get 225% SP for old Holy Shock and 223.2% SP for new Holy Shock. At 30% crit, you get 240% SP for old Holy Shock and 241.8% SP for new Holy Shock.

They scale differently.

The point of giving feedback is to let the developers know what you like and dislike. It's their job to parse that feedback and do something about it. They don't need you to math nerd out and do their jobs for them.


I agree. That's why I said it's perfectly fine for you to say that you don't like the unreliable Holy Shock, but I don't like that you're trying to blame developers for not trying your suggestion when you don't even understand why it might be bad.

People like big reliable holy shock crits. They don't like BfA unreliable holy shock.


Right, but they can't have those big reliable Holy Shock crits without sacrificing something else.

It's frustrating to me that people mindlessly defend boring design and think RNG is fun.


Mindlessly?

I do think some amount of RNG is fun, but I've never tried to defend this version of Holy Paladin as the best version it could be. I have multiple posts talking about things I'd like to see changed as well.

That's only assuming current balance was perfect and needed to be perfectly maintained, which is your assumption.


You've had to make the same assumptions as well. Why would you have made so many points trying to maintain similar balance if you didn't think it was important? You've also explicitly said that you were never asking for a buff, so that was an implied part of the discussion. This whole topic has been about how to change gameplay while keeping the same level of overall balance.

The entire premise of all your posts pretends that Blizzard has little to no wiggle room and that BfA design just has to be crap because of all these other factors that would have to change to make it less of a dreadfully boring design because everything is already set in stone and interdependent and we need to maintain some already existing balance (which probably doesn't actually exist yet anyway).


That's never been my premise. I tried to explain how this change to solve one issue would make other issues elsewhere. I've never said or implied anything about how this isn't possible.

We just had much more interesting class design in Legion...

I don't accept that they have to do what they're doing because it's too late and blah blah this is already dependent on that. Oh well. Fix it anyway.

...


I agree with you. I don't like the current design either, but it's abundantly clear that you don't actually understand what it takes to balance the suggestions you're making, let alone how long it takes to actually make those changes happen.

Reading between the lines, you can see that something happened in the development of this expansion that they've had to scrap. We went from the initial post about how almost all specs were finalized the day we switched from Alpha to Beta, to several specs getting sizable changes to talents and abilities over the last few weeks.

Maybe they thought Azerite would fill all of the gaps, or maybe there was some other system we've never seen that didn't pan out how they wanted to. Regardless, I don't think they're happy with this result either.

I'm not saying we should just accept whatever Blizzard offers, but I don't think it's too much to ask for at least some amount of empathy.

Originally when this was first brought up your argument was essentially "RNG is more fun!" Now you've switched to, "this just can't work because numbers are hard." I find both arguments to be flawed and don't agree.


I do still believe that Infusion of Light as more of a proc is more interesting, but I've never brought that up in this discussion because it wasn't relevant. I have no problem with you disagreeing with that. My argument has been the same the whole time: this change affects more than just the reliability of Holy Shock and Infusion of Light, and I don't think those changes are ones that I want to happen.

I've never said this wasn't possible. If you disagree with the "numbers are hard" argument, give me the simple change.
07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
Current Holy Shock has a flat 30% crit rating added to it, so it doesn't scale with crit like other spells.


Yes, I know. It's not relevant in my example at all.

07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
They scale differently.


We're talking about the ending average value in both cases. The base 30% is easily factored in.

It could easily scale to the same ending average, if that was a goal.

edit: IE: If holy shock hits for 100 and you have a base 5% crit and 30% crit just from shock, the average is 135 with no gear. If you add 20% crit from gear now the average is 155. This is easily kept the same. If you have 50% crit from gear the average is now 185.

Not sure why you continue to obsess over pointless numbers that have nothing at all to do with the suggestion. The changes in the equation for holy shock itself are a trivial change that have nothing to do with the discussion of whether or not it would be a good change. If infusion is considered too OP with 100% proc chance at the current values, great, change them, I think you're overestimating how strong it would be, but whatever. It's only under the premise that we had to maintain current values that it would need to be changed.

edit2: Also, they love to make little overall % tweaks to a classes kit if you're over or under performing all the time rather than making significant changes to the base values or mechanics, so it's more likely that they'd tweak that if Paladins ended up over the top rather than re-designing infusion and any talent related to holy shock.

07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
Why would you have made so many points trying to maintain similar balance if you didn't think it was important?


Because I was responding to you within the bounds of your premise. I specifically pointed out when I did so multiple times that it probably wasn't the case that it was already perfectly balanced anyway.

Again, my main feedback is about the mechanics and fun of the current iteration of the spec.
07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
Current Holy Shock has a flat 30% crit rating added to it, so it doesn't scale with crit like other spells.


Yes, I know. It's not relevant in my example at all.


My first question was specifically about how to change Holy Shock because the two different versions would scale differently with crit. You said they don't scale differently with crit and explained how crit works for spells other than Holy Shock and the Chaos Bolt version of Holy Shock, but that doesn't change the fact that the current version of Holy Shock scales differently with crit and you would have to account for that in some way.

[edit]:This is really just wrong. Holy Shock doesn't fundamentally scale differently than other spells, it just scales at a different rate than the Chaos Bolt version of Holy Shock because it has different multipliers.

07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
They scale differently.

We're talking about the ending average value in both cases. The base 30% is easily factored in.

It could easily scale to the same ending average, if that was a goal.


I don't understand what you're referring to when you say "ending". Are you talking about the end of the expansion? There's not some defined value of crit that we'll get to at the end of the expansion. Everyone will have different amounts of crit.

edit: IE: If holy shock hits for 100 and you have a base 5% crit and 30% crit just from shock, the average is 135 with no gear. If you add 20% crit from gear now the average is 155. This is easily kept the same. If you have 50% crit from gear the average is now 185.


You're not understanding how this works. Let's take your examples where the average is the same at 5%.

At 5% crit: Old HS is 202.5% (150 * 1.35), and new HS is 202.5% (96.4 * 2 * 1.05)
At 25% crit: Old HS is 232.5% (150 * 1.55), and new HS is 241.1% (96.4 * 2 * 1.25)
At 55% crit, Old HS is 277% (150 * 1.85), and new HS is 298.9% (96.4 * 2 * 1.55)

Do you see how they scale differently? They're the same average value at 5% crit, but the Chaos Bolt version of Holy Shock would heal for increasingly more than the current Holy Shock as you get more crit.

[edit]: Sorry, I didn't see that you were saying you were adding 20% and 50% to the base 5%, so I fixed the example. It doesn't change the argument though.

Not sure why you continue to obsess over pointless numbers that have nothing at all to do with the suggestion. The changes in the equation for holy shock itself are a trivial change that have nothing to do with the discussion of whether or not it would be a good change.


It does have an effect on the suggestion. I've conceded that this was a trivial argument, but that it points to the larger problem: that you don't understand the full effect of what you're asking for.

If infusion is considered too OP with 100% proc chance at the current values, great, change them.


Again, to what? They would also scale differently with crit.

I think you're overestimating how strong it would be, but whatever.


Are you basing that on anything?

edit2: Also, they love to make little overall % tweaks to a classes kit if you're over or under performing all the time rather than making significant changes to the base values or mechanics, so it's more likely that they'd tweak that if Paladins ended up over the top rather than re-designing infusion and any talent related to holy shock.


This change wouldn't affect all talents equally. A flat percent nerf after the change wouldn't equally nerf some of the outlier talents like Crusader's Might, Holy Avenger, Sanctified Wrath, and Divine Purpose.

Because I was responding to you within the bounds of your premise. I specifically pointed out when I did so multiple times that it probably wasn't the case that it was already perfectly balanced anyway.


When I brought up the fact that this would be a buff, you pointed out that you were never asking for a buff here:

06/29/2018 12:35 AMPosted by Zenetta
I said nothing specific about the actual numbers balance at all and did not ask for a buff at all let alone a very large one.


And also here:

I never said they should make change X without touching anything else, that's just some weird assumption you made.


You've made it sound like this entire discussion was based around the fact that we were trying understand how to make this change with the explicit goal of keeping the overall power the same.
Another build with zero changes.

RIP Holy Paladins... at least for the first Tier.
07/01/2018 10:42 PMPosted by Dreamguard
You've made it sound like this entire discussion was based around the fact that we were trying understand how to make this change with the explicit goal of keeping the overall power the same.


You have the obsession with the numbers being too complicated to change. I pointed out that if you wanted shock to have the exact same average value, it would be trivial to do so and it would. I didn't say they'd have to or that they'd even be likely to want that.

I think that entire idea is ridiculous at best. I don’t think it would be hard to balance or make this change, you do.

You've massively overcomplicated an issue and completely distracted from the main feedback about it.

Do you see how they scale differently?


Your example is pointless. Keeping the same average value if you really wanted, scaling the same with the same amount of crit rating, would be trivial and you're still wrong if you believe otherwise. You say they scale differently as if both versions already exist when the suggested version does not and has no solid equation for you to point at and rant about how the scaling works compared to the other.

You assumed the equation and then pointed out how your equation scales differently. Great, I couldn’t care less that your assumption forces it to work in a specific way. Nobody else ever said that’s how it would have to scale, you made it up because you’re the only one obsessing over the exact numeric value of a mechanical gameplay suggestion.

edit: And if you were just going off of how chaos bolt scales, I only pointed out chaos bolt as an example because it happens to be the only spell I could think of already existing that crits 100% of the time, not because I care about the exact equation behind chaos bolt. They can make the equation whatever they want to make it. I care about the mechanics and gameplay.

If they wanted it to scale exactly as it does now it would be as trivial as leaving that equation EXACTLY AS IT IS for the EXACT SAME AVERAGE (or constant in the case of the always critting version) value. Have a hidden 30% in the equation and just having the equation be [base value the same as the current value] * (1 + (super secret 0.3) + your crit chance value)) = surprise, the same number in either case because you can just use the same equation if it was currently balanced in such a perfect way that you wanted it to scale exactly the same.

Why is that complicated? I don’t think they’d necessarily actually do that, but the point remains that if you really want the thing to have the exact same average value as it currently does you can easily choose to do that if it’s your goal. Since it has the exact same value every time you cast it, it doesn't have to have a base value that doubles and is then modified by crit rating, you could, but it doesn't matter. It has a static value at any given stat values with no RNG involved and always procs infusion. That's the main point. Put whatever math you want to put behind it, we care about the mechanics.

edit: And if you really want a * 2 in there to be able to consider it a crit (even though it makes no real difference) you could just do 75% * 2, for the crit factor! * ( 1 + (secret .3 + crit value)) = MISSION ACCOMPLISHED MATH NERDS.

Your posts about this topic are just a red hearing distracting from the real feedback, which again, is:

RNG holy shock sucks. Reliable holy shock was better. Giving us reliable holy shock and removing dependence on crit would be a win for the spec.
07/02/2018 06:12 PMPosted by Arnath
Another build with zero changes.

RIP Holy Paladins... at least for the first Tier.


This seems like an aggressive overreaction to the current state of holy paladin.
07/02/2018 11:07 PMPosted by Shaneeya
07/02/2018 06:12 PMPosted by Arnath
Another build with zero changes.

RIP Holy Paladins... at least for the first Tier.


This seems like an aggressive overreaction to the current state of holy paladin.


I'm not sure about the word "aggressive," but yea, I'm sure they'll be perfectly viable and remain strong in some areas either because of their utility, self survival and/or tank healing.

I still find the design a boring Legion-lite disappointment though. Probably not going to be my personal first 120 if this is it.
07/02/2018 11:07 PMPosted by Shaneeya
This seems like an aggressive overreaction to the current state of holy paladin.


Overreactions are the only thing Blizzard responds too, myself and many others have tried the well thought out well written posts that are filled with good arguments but Blizzard never listens unless it is hyperbole.

Class design currently is the worst it has ever been, for all classes, everyone has tolled Blizzard this throughout testing but Blizzard ignores us. However i bet once this goes live and the masses see the mess Blizzard has made the backlash will be huge and Blizzard will be forced to respond. Like always, "aggressive overreactions" are the only thing Blizzard responds too.

Will Holy Paladins get a raid spot? Sure, maybe, but i foresee other healers being taken before us, but if we do get invited we will get the job done, it won't be fun to play, our HPS will be low, but we will get it done.

We might have to rely on Mythic+ for gearing since raid spots are not guaranteed.
Do our best to hold out till 8.1 and hope Blizz finally listens.
Still haven't seen any blue posts or any hint that we're being listened to, which feels bad. Awakening is trash and maraads would feel really good. I'm also all for the melee healer class fantasy, but I hate that my mandatory Avenging Crusader talent just means that I have to apply face to keyboard and pray it heals the right targets. The first time I get targeted with a mechanic during wings that takes me out of melee, I will turn my raid around and reroll priest I swear to god.
07/02/2018 10:21 PMPosted by Zenetta
You have the obsession with the numbers being too complicated to change.


I don't understand why you keep saying this. I've never said the change would be too complicated or that it's not possible. I've even tried to explain this to you when you've brought it up. Twice!

07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
I've never said or implied anything about how this isn't possible.


07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
I've never said this wasn't possible.


I'll say this as clearly as I can: I don't think the change you're suggesting is impossible to balance. I think making all of those balance changes is complicated and the effects of that balance could make other areas of gameplay less fun.

I pointed out that if you wanted shock to have the exact same average value, it would be trivial to do so and it would.

I don’t think it would be hard to balance or make this change, you do.

You've massively overcomplicated an issue and completely distracted from the main feedback about it.


You've talked about how easy this would be to balance, but you haven't actually shown that it would be easy. If this is as easy, trivial, and uncomplicated as you suggest, please explain how you would balance your suggestion.

You say they scale differently as if both versions already exist when the suggested version does not and has no solid equation for you to point at and rant about how the scaling works compared to the other.

You assumed the equation and then pointed out how your equation scales differently. Great, I couldn’t care less that your assumption forces it to work in a specific way. Nobody else ever said that’s how it would have to scale.

edit: And if you were just going off of how chaos bolt scales, I only pointed out chaos bolt as an example because it happens to be the only spell I could think of already existing that crits 100% of the time, not because I care about the exact equation behind chaos bolt.


You used Chaos Bolt as a frame of reference, and now you're saying it was wrong for me to have used an equation similar to Chaos Bolt. I wrote out the formula multiple times and you never said anything about it being wrong. I asked how you would adjust for the two formulas scaling differently with crit and you just said, "they don't."

you made it up because you’re the only one obsessing over the exact numeric value of a mechanical gameplay suggestion.


I guess I did technically make up the formula, but it's based on the game's mechanics. I didn't make those up.

And you're right; I'm the only one obsessing over the numeric values because no one else will. Most people will just take your suggestion at face value and never think about how it would affect anything else.

I think clarity is especially important in a feedback discussion because (as we've both demonstrated in this debate) there's almost always something lost in translation, and being able to clearly express ideas should be the goal when communicating with other players and developers.

If they wanted it to scale exactly as it does now it would be as trivial as leaving that equation EXACTLY AS IT IS for the EXACT SAME AVERAGE

...

edit: And if you really want a * 2 in there to be able to consider it a crit (even though it makes no real difference) you could just do 75% * 2, for the crit factor! * ( 1 + (secret .3 + crit value)) = MISSION ACCOMPLISHED MATH NERDS.


First, I just want to point out the irony of calling someone a "MATH NERD" during a discussion on class mechanics in the forums for World of Warcraft. It feels like we're all pretty nerdy here.

Second, this doesn't really make much sense. You've made the formulas match, but you've completely disregarded the fidelity of the game's mechanics. This is awkward and counter intuitive.

Imagine the tooltip: "Triggers a burst of Light on the target, dealing a critical strike for [2 * (45% of Spell power)] Holy damage to an enemy, or [2 * (75% of Spell power)] healing to an ally. Damage and healing is further increased by your critical strike chance. Has an additional 30% critical effect chance."

That's really confusing. Why would an ability that always crits have an additional chance to crit? And if you say, "it's a secret 30% that isn't on the tooltip", then that's still confusing. Why does an ability have an arbitrary flat value added to crit chance when there's no reason for it to be there?

Your posts about this topic are just a red hearing distracting from the real feedback, which again, is:

RNG holy shock sucks. Reliable holy shock was better. Giving us reliable holy shock and removing dependence on crit would be a win for the spec.


I don't fully understand how trying to clarify your suggestion is a distraction from it, but if you don't want to continue talking about it, that's fine. I've enjoyed the discussion either way.
I don't understand why you keep saying this. I've never said the change would be too complicated or that it's not possible. I've even tried to explain this to you when you've brought it up. Twice!


Your entire argument against the change was that it had a ripple effect and would require too many other things to change.

My counter argument was simply that if that was the only problem or reason that they didn't do it, they could easily keep the average the same, which would naturally mean that the balance of the spell itself as well as any related talent would remain the same. That would save them all the work of re-doing everything else if that was the concern.

Changing infusions value would be trivial. Or changing the value of holy light/flash.

07/03/2018 11:46 AMPosted by Dreamguard
That's really confusing. Why would an ability that always crits have an additional chance to crit?


It would be odd, but your entire argument was that it would be hard to balance and again, my counter argument is you could easily keep the value the same if they didn't want to go to the trouble of re-blancing everything.

That is the only reason. Not that it's common or normal. It was simply that if they perhaps had spent so much time already balancing BfA and did not want to re-balance around this mechanical change, they could easily choose to keep the average value the same to save themselves the trouble. Then next expansion they could revise it again.
07/03/2018 11:57 AMPosted by Zenetta
Your entire argument against the change was that it had a ripple effect and would require too many other things to change.


No, you've made this strawman argument several times. My argument is about how things would change, not about how many things would change.

My counter argument was simply that if that was the only problem or reason that they didn't do it, they could easily keep the average the same, which would naturally mean that the balance of the spell itself as well as any related talent would remain the same. That would save them all the work of re-doing everything else if that was the concern.


It's not easy to keep the average the same. I'll discuss your Holy Shock formula below, but you've never been able to give a reasonable answer for how to balance Infusion of Light either. The nerf to 20% (from 40%) for Flash of Light is really only the same at exactly 20% crit because that's where we have a 50% chance to get Infusion of Light from every Holy Shock, and 20% is half of 40%. Any other value of crit means that they don't have the same average value.

Similarly, balancing the reduced cast time of Holy Light isn't simple either. I suggested a change to 0.5s because it's half of the real value of the buff (1s; the extra 0.5 is below the GCD and not useful), but that's still only equal at 20% crit. On top of that, reducing Holy Light's cast time to 2s from 2.5s wouldn't feel very good compared to what we've had.

Let me be very clear here. I'm not saying that these changes are too complicated to work, and I'm not saying they're impossible. I'm saying that you haven't demonstrated how to achieve that balance, and the example I've given would make Infusion of Light feel worse.

Changing infusions value would be trivial. Or changing the value of holy light/flash.


Please stop saying things are trivial without giving a concrete example. Either it's trivial and you can explain how to do it, or it's probably not actually that trivial. The only examples you've given so far have not been balanced at all.

It would be odd, but your entire argument was that it would be hard to balance and again, my counter argument is you could easily keep the value the same if they didn't want to go to the trouble of re-blancing everything.

That is the only reason. Not that it's common or normal. It was simply that if they perhaps had spent so much time already balancing BfA and did not want to re-balance around this mechanical change, they could easily choose to keep the average value the same to save themselves the trouble. Then next expansion they could revise it again.


Imagine you're trying to teach a kid how to multiply. You would say, "2 * 3 = 6 because you're adding 2 groups of 3."

3 + 3 = 6, so 2 * 3 = 6 as well.

But instead, you've said that 2 * 3 = 6 because 3 + 4 - 1 = 6. You technically have the right answer, but you aren't actually making it clear at all. In fact, if the kid tried apply the same rule to multiply 2 * 4, they'd get 7; 4 + 4 - 1 (exchanging the 3 for a 4), or 4 + 5 - 2 (increasing every integer by 1).

That may be a silly example, but the point is that principles and guidelines are defined for a reason. It's no different for game mechanics. You've gotten to the answer, but you don't have a formula that is understandable or translates to anything else in the game. It doesn't apply to anything else, and when you're making a game that requires lots of other developers and players to be able to understand it, it should follow similar guidelines.
07/03/2018 01:34 AMPosted by Arnath
Overreactions are the only thing Blizzard responds too, myself and many others have tried the well thought out well written posts that are filled with good arguments but Blizzard never listens unless it is hyperbole.

Class design currently is the worst it has ever been, for all classes, everyone has tolled Blizzard this throughout testing but Blizzard ignores us. However i bet once this goes live and the masses see the mess Blizzard has made the backlash will be huge and Blizzard will be forced to respond. Like always, "aggressive overreactions" are the only thing Blizzard responds too.


This is a really toxic mentality to have, and it's just wrong. It only seems like hyperbole works because such a large portion of players use hyperbole and the developers make changes despite the hyperbole.

Imagine if I said the only way to communicate with you was with a vocabulary that a 5-year-old could understand because you can't understand anything more sophisticated. I would still be able to communicate with you, so I'd have proof that you don't understand anything more complex than that.

In that scenario, I'm just being a huge !@#$%^-. Which is what you're being right now.

Class design currently is the worst it has ever been, for all classes


Really? You don't think that certain specs like Feral, Shadow Priest, Protection Paladin, and Balance Druid being unplayable for most of Vanilla is worse? You're trying to add emotional charge to your statement to make to make it sound like it has more weight than it actually does.

It just makes things more confusing for developers to parse what you actually mean; it doesn't make your argument any less wrong.
07/03/2018 01:34 AMPosted by Arnath
07/02/2018 11:07 PMPosted by Shaneeya
This seems like an aggressive overreaction to the current state of holy paladin.


Overreactions are the only thing Blizzard responds too,


No one responds well when you start screaming at them, actually. Throwing tantrums isn't a good way to get anywhere. The arguments made here and the data that Blizzard has collected are how they're going to try to make classes work. Sometimes they fail at doing that. Frankly, I don't think they've failed in what they've done with holy paladin to this point. Could it be better? Sure. But past a certain point there's not a whole lot that the average player can do. That's a (very annoying) fact of the matter. Screaming about it isn't going to get Blizzard's attention any better than having a discussion with them about it, and I know very well that the latter of those options is a lot more likely to get a response. So let's move away from the Chicken Little hyperbole and trust Blizzard to listen.
I love how the last two pages are argument over something that will never happen ever. Nice.
07/03/2018 03:21 PMPosted by Dreamguard
This is a really toxic mentality to have, and it's just wrong. It only seems like hyperbole works because such a large portion of players use hyperbole and the developers make changes despite the hyperbole.


I agree, it is stupid. It is toxic. Yet, time and time again, it works.
Is it the only way to get Blizzard to listen? No, but it is the most effective.
The entire history of this game proves it.
I don't like it, like i said we have all tried the other way, but yet nothing is ever done until people get angry.

We haven't had a single Blue post since April and no changes since they slapped Avenging Crusader into PvE, we have been left neglected and are going into an expansion with more dead talents than Live. Clearly the last few months of talking nicely and giving constructive feedback has fallen upon deaf ears.

07/03/2018 03:45 PMPosted by Shaneeya
So let's move away from the Chicken Little hyperbole and trust Blizzard to listen.


Trust goes both ways. Blizzard hasn't given any sign that they are listening, all evidence currently shows that they are ignoring us.

Not that any of this matters, development on the Beta is nearly over. 8.0 is marked for release. Everything we say now is largely pointless and is best left for 8.1 PTR.
At this point I wouldn't mind if they came out with an apology post that they needed to delay the release of BfA for up to 2 months while they sort out class mechanics for many specs. Seems like a better alternative to having to wait for patch 8.1 to get things iron out for about 25% of all the specs in the game.
Well I played Holy pally a lot in Cata, most of WoD and all of Legion and won't be playing it at the start of BFA. Though class design seemed to get a big hit for this expansion my main reason for not playing holy pally just came down to being pigeon holed into a lot of Holy Lights. I'm just not a fan of the slow cast model. However if this is the price I have to pay for a quicker release schedule I'm willing to make that tradeoff. I'm really enjoying the content pacing that began with the start of Legion.
I agree, it is stupid. It is toxic. Yet, time and time again, it works.
Is it the only way to get Blizzard to listen? No, but it is the most effective.
The entire history of this game proves it.
I don't like it, like i said we have all tried the other way, but yet nothing is ever done until people get angry.


"I could make a lot of money by robbing you. Yeah, it is stupid. It is illegal. Yet, time and time again, it works."

You don't get to justify being toxic to other human beings because you think it's effective. And again, it's not effective. Try to look up any information from an actual developer about feedback, and it will say that being hyperbolic and toxic makes your point worse.

We haven't had a single Blue post since April and no changes since they slapped Avenging Crusader into PvE, we have been left neglected and are going into an expansion with more dead talents than Live. Clearly the last few months of talking nicely and giving constructive feedback has fallen upon deaf ears.


I'll quote what I said in an earlier post:

07/01/2018 08:08 PMPosted by Dreamguard
Reading between the lines, you can see that something happened in the development of this expansion that they've had to scrap. We went from the initial post about how almost all specs were finalized the day we switched from Alpha to Beta, to several specs getting sizable changes to talents and abilities over the last few weeks.

Maybe they thought Azerite would fill all of the gaps, or maybe there was some other system we've never seen that didn't pan out how they wanted to. Regardless, I don't think they're happy with this result either.

I'm not saying we should just accept whatever Blizzard offers, but I don't think it's too much to ask for at least some amount of empathy.


Just because we haven't seen a Blue Post since April doesn't mean they aren't listening. No major changes doesn't mean we haven't been heard, it just means that they either disagree with how to make changes, or don't have the production time to do it anymore.
I think its fair to say we will see little to no changes outside of numbers tuning before patch 8.1. There are other things that take priority for the time being. I Just hope that in that patch new life can be injected into the specialization. Right now to me it feels like the class is lacking depth and decision making.

This thread has good discussion in it so I won't make a large post like normal. All I have to say is I personally have never felt more frustrated or downright sad about the state of the class, it feels like a downgrade from Legion. I know that blizzard had nothing but good intentions with the changes they made. It seems like something went wrong and we may never know what happened, but things happen and as Dreamguard mentioned blizzard is a company comprised of humans.

I will try to put my issues with the current state of the class into words as succinctly as possible.

I want to constantly be thinking about what i am doing, I want to feel like every moment of game play matters. Currently I feel like a significant portion of my game play doesn't matter, that I am just treading water waiting for Holy Shock and/or Light of Dawn to come up. Then it comes up and the payoff for that waiting doesn't feel satisfying.

I'll leave it there.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum