This is a better philosophy then “Bring the player not the class”. I’d much rather have classes that are fairly unique in their utility all having their niche’s instead of what we have now. Ever since that “philosophy” has been put into place the quality of class design has been horrendous. So bring the class not the player.
2 Likes
So you believe a player who is more competent for a role should be secondary to meet a quota? I disagree.
A better solution is balancing the classes so there’s as equal representation as possible.
11 Likes
Bring the player (who has a repair mount)
I’ll be honest, operating under the assumption that the average pug player will know their class well enough is a recipe for failure.
Lots of classes have great niches and utility. How often does the random player use them?
The devs are waaay ahead of you; there’s absolutely no reason to bring a caster over an mdps in M+. Even in Quaking weeks where your melee space is restricted it’s better to have a Hunter over a caster, at least they don’t have to deal with the interrupt nonsense.
3 Likes
How about we make a compromise (I heard the devs love those) and just nerf DH instead OP?
5 Likes
I love how you twist every thread into “nerf DHs”.
Not all heroes wear capes.
2 Likes
The issue with the general concept isnt a flaw in the concept itself, but in how people regard it.
At high levels of play people will try to take every edge they can, and having classes fill a unique role can be healthy.
The main problem comes when people who arent at the highest level of play try to adopt the same mentality.
Refusing certain players for ideal compositions when the percentage advantage it gives you is almost 0%.
3 Likes
But I have amazing biceps RL. You should always bring the player.
1 Like
I have repair mounts AND repair bots.
2 Likes
Pics or it didn’t happen.
Partially true, but mdps have inherently higher mobility and their ccs are in a much lower cd. Their drawback is uptime which is rarely an issue, most of the encounters are tailored around mdps being able to stay within range.
I wish blizzard doubled down on class fantasy, that was apparently in legion? I’m a bfa only player since Burning Crusade. It’s very sad and disheartening to see that even with all the success wow has enjoyed over the years, that they decided homogenizing 12 classes into 3 mechanically simple niches was the direction they decided to take. Yes having 12 diverse and interesting experiences per class is a more difficult task, but what are we paying for? (edited for clarity)
Right now Holy Priest is having a lot of problems, but any time you try to bring up possible fixes, you are met with a bunch of “holy is fine, L2P” because you can still run keys or whatever with enough competency.
Changing the design paradigm so that Holy can get nice things that aren’t directly correlated with their competency (like resto druid damage/survivability/utility is) would be nice.
Yes exactly, the need for a quota was the problem, not the whole class, people enjoy their class fantasy in a mmorpg shocker, i know… immersion in a virtual world keep up, gutting and destroying that for some imaginary quota? for some tiny fraction of the playerbase was the stupid most simp move blizzard has ever done.
1 Like
Dank 
he knows
1 Like
It’s shame, blizzard ruined classes for some obscure need to satisfy the worst kinds of players of games, nerds don’t want great games, they want easy games they can break, Blizzard gave them that again, and again, and again and look at where we are.
Your idea reminds me a bit of Classic.
Bring the mage, for their mage water. Bring the lock, to summon people to the entrance. Don’t bring the druid, for reasons. So unless you have those particular classes that provide features the RL wants, you likely miss out.
It’s probably not exactly what someone might appreciate, if they happen to be playing a class that is considered less worthy at the time.
Poor class design, poor game design, how is that any of the players who pay $15 a month fault? why should everybody suffer?
1 Like
I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you are saying. Is it in response to my comment, or just the topic in general and whatever it is…what do you mean?
Why not both? 