its not arbitrary. there is a significant reason to limit druids / rogues / disc priests. i agree its not the most elegant solution, (that solution would just be to nerf the ever living heck out of those specs) but it is a solution that would work seamlessly.
1 Like
and?
Iâm not sure what youâre struggling to comprehend. representation is usually a bi product on balancing in which RBGs are not a priority for inside of a game thatâs primarily PvE orientated.
carry grp prevelence just isnât comparable to S1 and theyâre pretty rare to come across right now.
I donât think that would even be the case. It just doesnt make sense to have every class be good and balanced at everything.
RBGs became way more objective intensive from Legion because how efficient it is now to gather information from across the map with BGE and being able to see where people are through the map with nameplates.
Why would anybody invest in playing a game when theyâre restricted later on because the class they wish to play for is too powerfulâŚ? This works to both sides of the weak and the strong but RBG just isnât a balance priority.
Thatâs just
âWHY WOULD I EVEN LEVEL A BOOMKIN IF I CANT COMPRISE 20%+ of EVERY RBG TEAM.â âWHY WOULD I LEVEL A DISC PRIEST IF IM NOT 40+% OF THE LADDERâ
see how stupid you sound? see how incredibly dumb that was to even ask? no you probably dont.
1 Like
You are indeed, demonic.
Iâm just curious what issue it actually solves. Some specs get more invites, while others get less.
My point was more universal. The âbestâ spec will be more highly represented even if it only has a marginal advantage, regardless of the metric. Stricter spec balancing will have a lot of diminishing returns when it comes to actually increasing spec representation.
1 Like
I think if they really wanted a restriction, theyâd make their own groups and only invite 1 of each (class or spec).
But having that much power isnât good enough and they need it to be implemented for them because theyâre just serial lazy, complainers.
Agreed, which is why this should be out of the players hands. Remember when only Shamans had Lust? Why do you think that was changed?
Lazy reasoning/unacceptable answer.
Iâm giving you enough credit to think that you know how stupid this sounds, right?
Would create a bottle neck when trying to group (trying to find 3 unique healer specs at 3am fot instance). Also would stop friends from queuing together if people play the same toon, etc.
I donât think it would be a good change.
1 Like
This is a strange analogy. Are you advocating for class restrictions or adding druid abilities to other classes?
This is a player perception issue more than anything else. The majority of the player base probably resides in the 1400-1800 bracket where team comp barely matters at all, so adding a restriction negatively impacts more players than those who benefit.
Limiting a team to 1 boomkin is not going to make people start taking bad specs on blind faith.
it would force people to start taking lesser specs because they would still need 10 bodies in the match, and they wouldnt be taking 4 boomkins 3 disc priests and 3 others. it would be 10 different specs instead of 5 different specs.
This is why WoW is dying, but I digress. Anecdotally, having a boomkin myself, I have never played on a team with more than 1 other boomkin and 3 disc priests. How often is this actually happening?
wow is dying because we are 30+ weeks into a season (again) with no real end in sight. wow is dying because the company leadership is the dregs of society and the non-leadership workers are overworked and underpaid. wow is dying because quality across every branch of the game has plummeted. wow isnt dying because you can only queue 1 boomkin at a time. that was a really dumb thing to say.
frequently.
It was tongue in cheek moreso than anything, but I believe forcing players to do bad content in order to get to good content is also a key factor in the dwindling numbers. This just forces the playerbase to fix their problem.
I think simply looking at representation and trying to restrict/nerf classes is short-sighted as well. You have to ask yourself why something like discipline is over-represented, and what will happen if they are nerfed/restricted. Is it a net positive for the game if there is better spec representation at the cost of your team getting trucked because your Rdruid/Hpal canât keep up? Healer representation is relative to the current state of damage.
no its a net positive for the game if you balance outliers like disc/boomy so that restrictions like this arent necessary
That isnât the discussion here though.
Well it is. Itâs been brought up several times by more than just me that restricting comp would be an alternative to just brutalizing the outlier specs
But it goes far further than simply nerfing those specs. Why do you think Disc is so good? Stacking damage multipliers is the name of the game right now. Discipline is the spec that is best at dealing with it because of high damage reduction cooldowns. What are the other specs going to do when 3 of their players get globalled?
radiance healing, aoe fear, barrier, and pain supp, lifegrip.
Oh also mindgames + mind control
Itâs just the fact of the matter.
Itâs not lazy and itâs not unacceptable. Itâs just something you refuse to understand.
Itâs literally what youâre asking for. Go make a group, restrict classes like youâre asking to do, and play like that. Youâre asking for it, now saying how silly it would be to impose it.
Essentially, making the game more miserable because youâre being descriminated against because youâre not orange or white.
1 thing you said here was correct.
I encourage you to actually participate in RBGs this season.