anti-Dual Spec people are a tiny minority of Classic players

[Redheadchild-kul-tiras (Redheadchild)]

@Ziryus-pagle

Okay and dual spec is some changes

Yet your trying to use past changes as justification for it. So that is, by its very definition, the slippery slope, which means all changes.

[Ziryus-pagle]

@Redheadchild-kul-tiras

@Ziryus-pagle

Okay and dual spec is some changes

Yet your trying to use past changes as justification for it. So that is, by its very definition, the slippery slo pe, which means all changes.

Well no, past changes are being used to show you that your #nochanges argument is garbage, you just can’t come up with anything else.

[Spheric-westfall]

@Lemonfont-faerlina

Either this is your first day on discussion board or you’re intentionally lying because you happen to disagree with some of my threads.

You made this post purely because its been pointed out before that you generally post the opposite of what the majority want. This post is to save face and nothing more.

[Egwyn-arugal]

@Slicy-netherwind

• Find subject most agree on
• Make topic saying exact opposite

Not in this case champ

[Redheadchild-kul-tiras (Redheadchild)]

@Ziryus-pagle

Well no, past changes are being used to show you that your #nochanges argument is garbage, you just can’t come up with anything else

Except the argument isn’t about no changes. It’s that changes made should be made in a way that doesn’t go directly against the design goal intentions (not the exact design, by the intentions behind them) of tbc.

You endlessly try to misrepresent this view as no changes when it isn’t about that at all. Changes are fine as long as it doesn’t directly go against the design goal intentions of tbc and are made with the goal of staying withing the experience of tbc.

Drums was a great example of this, they were changes to better reflect the intentions of their design. Not the actual design.

[Ziryus-pagle]

@Redheadchild-kul-tiras

Except the argument isn’t about no changes.

Your sole argument is “that’s just the way it was” IE #nochanges.

You refuse to provide a real reason dual spec would be bad.

[Egwyn-arugal]

@Horace-remulos

@Lemonfont-faerlina

Thus the community has shown by overwhelming majority to be for dual spec, despite posts providing and picturing doubt that it the issue is far more mixed or 50/50, which evidence has shown that to be not even close to the truth.

“Opinion” my foot.

Not really friendo. Unfortunately your guys repeated argument that pro dual spec posters are “a vocal minority”, when we look at things like

• number of likes on pro-dual spec original posts
• number of unique posters in each thread
• number of unique posters in favour of versus against dual spec

We can quickly make a fairly objective observation that a.) the issue is highly popular, and b.) those who want the change change eclipse those who don’t.

[Babypuke-whitemane]

Good thing game-design isn’t a democracy then! Man think how much worse it could get if we left it up to the lowest common denominator.

[Redheadchild-kul-tiras (Redheadchild)]

@Ziryus-pagle

Your sole argument is “that’s just the way it was” IE #nochanges

When you refuse to even acknowledge what the argument is there’s no point in giving you other reasons.

Until you get past your “everything you say is nochanges” phase there is no reason to even discuss anything else with you.

Other reasons for why dual spec is bad have been given, even giving a quote from ghost crawler and how he thought it had negative effects is something you are ignoring and keep pushing your “all you have is nochanges” agenda.

[Ziryus-pagle]

@Redheadchild-kul-tiras

When you refuse to even acknowledge what the argument is there’s no point in giving you other reasons.

I have acknowledged your only legitimate argument, it might impact raids, great add a cool down and/or requirement to be in town.

Next.

[Egwyn-arugal]

And yes these forums are a bit of an echo chamber but they are none the less a perfectly valid statistical sample, and furthermore, every time I (like many others) run this question past non-forum goers, the majority of responders want it, and a minority are indifferent. I could count the number of people who didn’t on one hand, if I could even think of any.

[Egwyn-arugal]

Yeah we’d have whining horde players rewarded with hvh battlegrounds and whining 1400 oceanic players rewarded with a dead, oceanic only pvp ladder

[Bearhands-faerlina]

@Lemonfont-faerlina

which evidence has shown that to be not even close to the truth.

Well I have no doubt you wouldn’t make such a claim on the internet without providing any of said evidence. Certainly there’s no chance you’re making up a number entirely because you agree with the outcome.

That would definitely never happen. Right?

[Intolerable-atiesh]

Remember that redheadchild actually supports dual spec, he is anti free respeccing.

He has stated this numerous times.

[Bearhands-faerlina]

@Ziryus-pagle

I have acknowledged your only legitimate argument, it might impact raids, great add a cool down and/or requirement to be in town.

You haven’t… And youve continued in all 10 threads you’re repeating the same nonsense in.

If you disagree with the MANY arguments put forth both here and BY BLIZZARD EMPLOYEES as to why dual spec negatively impacts the game then fine. Thats certainly your prerogative.

But to pretend that no one has made any arguments against it at all and yours is the only one that has been offered… well that just makes you look foolish.

[Ziryus-pagle]

@Bearhands-faerlina

@Ziryus-pagle

I have acknowledged your only legitimate argument, it might impact raids, great add a cool down and/or requirement to be in town.

You haven’t… And youve continued in all 10 threads you’re repeating the same nonsense in.

If you disagree with the MANY arguments put forth both here and BY BLIZZARD EMPLOYEES as to why dual spec negatively impacts the game then fine. Thats certainly your prerogative.

But to pretend that no one has made any arguments against it at all and yours is the only one that has bee n offered… well that just makes you look foolish.

Blizzard has made zero statements one way or the other regarding dual spec in TBC Classic.

[Bearhands-faerlina]

LIke I said… continue the deliberate ignorance all you want but the only outcome at this point is making yourself look silly.

Blizzard stated originally why they thought dual spec was a bad idea in TBC, IE that it made your spec less of a deliberate choice. Nothing surrounding that has changed so there’s no reason to think the underlying philosophy has changed absent any other evidence.

And, once again, you still foolishly miss the point. Regardless of whether or not you think Blizzard continues to agree WITH said point… it is still an argument against dual spec (and one which was originally offered by a Blizzard Employee no less.) So, once again, to repeat OVER AND OVER AND OVER “no one has offered any reason why we shouldn’t implement dual spec” is either disingenuous or mind-numbingly stupid.

[Ziryus-pagle]

Okay please provide any statement from blizzard regarding dual spec in TBC Classic.

Can you?

[Redheadchild-kul-tiras (Redheadchild)]

@Ziryus-pagle

I have acknowledged your only legitimate argument, it might impact raids, great add a cool down and/or requirement to be in town.

Nex t.

Except that’s not the only argument, it’s the only one YOU deem legitimate. You also don’t want to acknowledge how Ghostcrawler pointed out how it damages class/character identity.

This has been brought up by people against dual spec in tbcc as well when they mention spec identity, class identity, exc. And how dual spec hurts that. You consider that an illegitimate argument though, yet even ghostcrawler brought it up and said he felt dual spec hurt that aspect of the game.

http s://mobile.twitter.c om/ghostcrawler/status/393042570650996737

Link. For reference.

[Bearhands-faerlina]

@Bearhands-faerlina

either disingenuous or mind-numbingly stupid.

Hanlon suggests its the latter. Thanks for comfirming