I dunno, it’s better than what is currently in place… and honestly im not even someone who is fighting for dual spec, for the sheer fact that i really don’t care that much. But for me, the only decision that makes sense is dual spec… there is no reason to be against it. The purists are screeching against it for the sheer fact that it doesn’t suite them and their vision, though the majority seem to want it with a few outliers.
No, we are against it because it would upset the pve game balance.
I know you find pve boring, so it most likely wouldn’t impact you at all, but many of us do like pve and dual spec would be catastrophic for it.
Not true. I enjoy PVE… how does it upset the game balance? Being able to heal without dropping 100g and going to trainer… is a GREAT thing.
Already stated many times further above. Please read.
Then you’ll need to go to a server that actually has a Horde population. Bloodsail is an alliance heavy server.
Dumbest. Take. Ever. Catastrophic? BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Bloodsail has a low but sufficient horde population. Back in the day when server sizes were smaller it probably would have been considered a medium population server. It’s funny that you would be making these dual spec arguments for “authenticity” in BC while claiming I need to go to a server with a population that would have been considered massively over populated in original BC. Nothing near the population of the maga-servers existed in original bc
In Diablo 2 you couldn’t respec at all. That affected how people “approach the game” and their “experience with the game”.
Let’s pretend you couldn’t respec in World of Warcraft. That would have a profound effect on the game, and it would completely reshape our experience with the game.
When you say “design theory”, it seems to imply that the 50g respec cost was specifically part of TBC game design instead of a carryover from vanilla, unchanged. Even though gold became far more abundant presumably by a factor of 5-to-1(epic flying vs epic ground).
Furthermore, dual-spec wasn’t added as part of WOTLK “design theory”. It was added as a response to the uproar caused by the player experience in TBC.
I’m about as hardcore as they come. I sat outside Babbages in the mall to get my preorder copy of TBC back in 2007. I played on private servers for years, and only the “blizz-like” private servers. Emerald Dream, Nostalrius, Kronos, then later Elysium/Lightbringer/Northdale.
The private servers ALWAYS had reduced respec costs. For Nostalrius it was 25g, and for Kronos it was only 5g. The newest big private server(Darrowshire) has it capped at 10g.
The truth is, the 50g respec was always bad game design, and literally no one can explain why 50g is the right number.
I am literally playing a classic version of a game that has been several times reiterated, hundreds (thousands?) of changes and modifications of game systems and mechanics, over almost 2 decades to personally re-experience that “poor design” (subjective).
That’s what I’m paying $15 for.
That’s the entire point of these classic projects.
It’s the ENTIRE POINT.
What about this do you people not get?
The bad design elements/quirks are inherently and intrinsically fused to my desire to play this version of the game.
You want me to spend my $15 playing not-TBC, or even-less-like-TBC for some reason, and I’ll never understand it.
You’re paying $15 a month to pay 50g respecs?
Tell me your thoughts on Tinnitus debuff, same-faction queues, etc.
Also, is 50g even 50g now that people have so much more gold than they did in 2007? I remember an epic mount being an achievement in vanilla, but in Classic people had enough gold before they even hit max level.
It’s simple:
If 50g isn’t a big deal, then stop whining about dual spec and go pay it.
This line of argumentation for dual spec is a poor one because it immediately caves in on itself.
When did I say 50g isn’t a big deal?
By asking “is 50g really 50g?” you are attempting to imply that holding on to a 50g respec cost is pointless because it doesn’t mean as much as it used to.
Clearly 50g is 50g because you can clearly tell people are hot and bothered having to pay it, even though the entire intended purpose of it is to deter you from respeccing, but since weve had “some changes”, people think they can literally get anything they want down to modifying the very intricate lifeblood of how the game was intended to be experienced.
And yes, I am paying $15 for respecs to cost 50g, just like I am epic flying to cost 5000g, or reputations to be necessary for heroics, or attunements needed for raids.
I am paying $15/month to experience TBC as close to what it actually was. So yes.
1 Like
Just because it worth less than it was then, doesn’t mean it isn’t a big deal. It just means it was an even bigger deal back then. If you’re demanding a recreation of TBC as it was, you would need to demand they raise respec costs.
Plus the 50g respec was created in vanilla, where there was even less gold.
I figured out the solution. Each class has one “main spec” that they play as a sort of sub-class within their class and they perform this role in daily activities.
Throughout playing the “main spec” they acquire gold they can use on things, and if they want to change to an “off spec” they use this gold to play that different style, and the cost incrementally goes up as you change specs to a cap of say 50g.
We did it.
3 Likes
Brilliant. Shame nobody thought of this before, coulda ended this debate much sooner!
1 Like
Why cap it at 50g? Why not 100g? Think about how much more fun they could have “acquiring gold” in their “main spec” if you raised the respec cap.
Sorry, but it was not 100g in real TBC, so this would be a fundamental modification I can’t get behind.
It should be adjusted for inflation so it feels the same as it did back then.