Your post is a nostalgia-fest that doesn’t allow for the real data to be correct, and your feelings to be wrong in any way.
People keep making these requests left right and center, and they expect what… the devs to totally change their minds?
The “glory” of classic is bait. It was what it was, and it will be what it will be.
Kargar, it’s not about nostalgia man.
In what way are my suggestions nostaliga?
I see them as rather concrete changes that will affect the challenge, the longevity of the game - the wow classic experience to the better.
Easy is not fun, the feeling of succes comes when you overcame a challenge.
I’m against implementing changes that never were in the game.
But, if they can aid somewhat to the challenge by looking at older patches - why shouldn’t they?
It is nostalgia. Because almost all of the content was easy as hell, minus a couple of dungeons that were tuned for 10-15 people.
Why don’t they pick a patch and stick with it? Why shouldn’t they?
Do you see how stupid this suggestion is?
I try to understand where you are coming from, but I just cant - sorry man.
What is nostalgic about for example changing back Zul’Farrak Dead Heroes to elites in ZF?
There is no self serving purpose of trying, to in an exact way, recreating 1.12 when that patch equals faceroll content.
I’d rather have a version of classic built upon settings that actually were in the game to aid to the challenge (yeah it still won’t be hard per say, but it will atleast aid to the challenge, more so then 1.12).
I don’t se the downside to that.
I’m only discussing the “what” now, not the “how”. I’ll leave that to the proffesionals (blizz).
I was a god back then. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
The major flaw would be in that you are a creating an experience that never existed, not for you, not for me, nor for anyone else that played then.
The reason the " recreating the vanilla experience " is a flawed argument is that it is impossible to do, which is something Blizzard stated very early on. It’s the reason why they asked for feedback to make decisions about what and how it should be in the game.
The problem is that when you started and when I started were two different times, with two different sets of rules, and the game in two different states. You started early, before things were fixed, before classes were revamped, and before they made the adjustments to make things work better as 5 mans. However, I started after ( or at least didn’t reach that point til after ) those things were done. There is absolutely no way they can recreate the vanilla experience for both of us.
So basically what we have is Blizzard making a choice and saying this is how it’s going to be. It won’t reflect your vanilla experience, heck it won’t reflect mine either, but it will someones.
Ours gets to be close, or close enough, and frankly that’s ok. What they have done is basically to say that they have this version they can reference. They know it’s correct, so they will base everything off of that, because anything else would be based off of feeling, rather than hard numbers.
We do need pre-nerf content and to progressively nerf it appropriately for each content phase. Also consider additional buffs to the content to compensate the better classes than back then, but do NOT overtune it to the point where it’s impossible without full consumes, world buffs, and perfect min-maxing.
Sarcasm right?
There’s no point to doing this. Classic was fun because people hadn’t done it before. Making it harder isn’t going to make it fun all over again.
Numbers don’t matter. The experience does matter. When content is way easier than it should be, you have a big problem. It’s already enough that information about it is abundant unlike back in the day and the leadership in the decent guilds know exactly what to do as far as raid prep and the instances. We don’t need to make it worse with content that is already nerfed on launch.
Who’s experience matters? That’s the point I’m getting at. Neither you, nor I, get to dictate what the experience should be, because for others this nerfed state as you call it, is exactly what Vanilla WoW was.
The game was never Dark Souls level of hard. Heck, it was one of the easier MMOs out there, but it still didn’t hold your hand and you had to put in effort to be rewarded. A huge part of vanilla is doing a major task and the rewarding feeling when you finish. If the content is already nerfed, then that feeling will be nerfed too. It’s already going to be easier than it was back then if they did it pre-nerf in Classic because of the information available today, but it would still be rewarding. You had to have been carried if you never got that feeling in vanilla.
All that will happen is that 99% of the retail babies defending the nerfed state will quit before they hit level 30 because it takes too long and the private server players will continue to play on private servers that care about the experience. That leaves them with a big loss. The obvious solution is to revert the nerfs.
It’s quite simple actually.
I try to have a micro approach in debates like this. If we stay macro it’s all to abstract to understand the effects of the arguments.
Again in my example, let’s say that Blizz would ONLY revert some of the nerfs to Zul’farak - and that was it. Nothing else.
For example;
* Reduced the damage dealt by the Sul’lithuz Abomination and Sul’lithuz Sandcrawler.
* Zul’Farrak Dead Heroes are no longer elites.
* Antu’sul’s Sul’lithuz Broodlings now only hatch 4 at a time and are significantly weaker.
So what you guys are saying is that if they were to revert these above changes to Zul’Farak (making the instance slightly more challenging - again by only using existing settings/data from earlier patches), that this would be a bad thing?
In beta you can go in and tank with a 2 hander and pull 4 mobs and zerg everything down. It’s not as bad as on retail but not far from it, why is that a good thing? Or is it a good thing only in that sense that it is a perfect copy of 1.12?
I don’t care about 1.12, I care about the longevity of the game and it’s original design philosophy.
Never said I didn’t get that feeling, although for me WoW felt very hand holdish from the start, but I came from Sandbox MMO’s which just plopped you down and said figure it out.
It still will take time and effort, despite what you see from streams, you won’t be capped at level so you can turn yourself into a twink. None of the people you play with will be in that state either.
The fact is for Blizzard they want to be able to look at it and know what they have is correct, because that was part of their goal. That is why they numbers matter because then they have a reference to know what they are doing is 100% spot on. It’s not a feeling, it’s not nostalgia, it’s hard factual numbers they can look at and say " yep that’s right " or " nope that’s definitely bugged ".
That’s the problem right there. They care more about the numbers than the actual experience. It’s ok to be a bit inaccurate if it means an experience closer to the real thing.
See for you it’s ok for them to be a bit inaccurate, meanwhile they have a whole host of people picking apart every single number making sure it is as accurate as possible.
It’s why I said they can never make everyone happy, and I think in this case they have gone with the idea that they will use the exact numbers and data and it let be what it is.
I can appreciate that Caelle, but that’s why Blizzard should officially leave this “numbers debate” and just say this;
“trust us in recreating the vanilla experience, we will only use input from patches that have existed in the game”.
That’s all ![:slight_smile:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
By even officially announcing that “we are going to recreate patch 1.12”, is what has created this “numbers” debate in the first place.
And it has completely thrown us of track, even the developers - I’m afraid.
No the numbers debate was created precisely because no one trusts Blizzard, so asking people to trust them in recreating the experience simply won’t fly.
Look at this forum, even the decisions they have made are picked apart at every turn. I’ve about decided the very reason they are pretty much going with 1.12 across the board so that despite what people might like or dislike, they can’t say that it wasn’t exactly as it was at some point.
It’s looking like I will have no problems at all dual wield tanking MC/Ony as MT in progression with how undertuned content is. It’s by no means optimal on every boss, but it’s perfectly doable for every tank to dual wield in MC/Ony. Bookmark this post, because I’m going to actually have every tank dual wield one run on stream once we cleared everything just to show how undertuned it is. This will just be a typical semi-hardcore guild as well.
Well in a way you are correct, still though - if they wouldn’t have gone public with a statement in regards to a specific patch and the wish to recreate that exact patch, the “numbers” debate wouldn’t have had the same foundation for it’s arguments.
Why?
Because of lack in terms of reference. If noone knew exactly what to compare to, then they can’t shove data in Blizzards face. Hence again why we’re off track disucssing numbers instead of the experience.
I’m not refering to a static experience, since there is no such thing. But there are core elements that in general creates different types of experiences, hence again the original design pillars that made the game what it was.