The great thing about the forums is it’s very easy to multi task 
I can easily point out the issues caused by lack of dual spec while doing something in game(not like WoW doesn’t have plenty of down time anyways you need to fill with somethig), or for that matter in another game altogether or while watching netflix.
Actually it worked out very well in some areas and not so well in other areas. Like all design choices there were tradeoffs. The reason they changed direction in design focus was that the lead designer of TBC moved on to be lead dev for Overwatch and other games and the new lead designer coming in for WoTLK had a different design vision - one you personally prefer.
But your idea of a perfect design focus versus a flawed one is not how design decisions work. Some are flawed but all of the successful design choices are a mix of pros and cons - tradeoffs. You hope the pros outweigh the cons for your target market at that time.
TBC and its design formula worked exceedingly well. The game grew exponentially during that expansion. It was hardly a failure.
Hmm… I’m not the one falling back on that’s the way it was so it must have been good as a pro or con for dual spec.
What we can say and you seem to agree with is that no design is perfect. So trying to claim that just because there was no dual spec originally in TBC that means it’s good for TBC Classic not to have it doesn’t really work.
And when we look at it we can see the exact same problems that lead to dual spec being added and were present in TBC and are once again present in TBC Classic. And given that noone can give an actual problem with dual spec and how it wouldn’t interact well with TBC it’s very reasonable to think it would be quite welcome in TBC CLassic.
That’s a poor summary of my position. I am not arguing, and never have, that we should not change anything from the “way it was”.
This is where I think you are completely misunderstanding my position.
You assume the following:
Premise - All things in the game and their outcomes are intended to be in the game.
Therefore, if you require things to be in line with what was originally intended then you cannot support changes to the game as all things in the game and their results are intended and anything else is not.
However - your premise is flat wrong. Not all things in the game are there by intent - or rather not everything in the game behave perfectly as intended, nor are they a perfect realization of the intended function or design. Thus your protestation that my position is akin to saying #nochanges, is flawed and incorrect.
If you assume - like I do - that TBC was not a perfectly designed game, then it is not difficult to accept that some changes more perfectly realise the designers intentions than what they were able to do at the time.
Your reducing to things to a false equivalence - you’re reducing conformity to design intent down to conformity of function.
I’m arguing that WoTLK Dual Spec runs counter to the expressed design intentions of respeccing by the TBC developers. It’s not an enhancement of but rather a breaking of that design intention - and a replacement of it with another opposing design focus. Importantly I don’t believe an Arena specific spec runs counter that design.
Then you have fundamentally misunderstood. That is the exact opposite of what I have said this entire time.
Maybe things were designed in specific ways in vanilla(or in some cases they just threw random stuff at the wall) and they ended up having unintended and negative consequences. The ways specs worked being one of those. Hence why we saw massive reworks to specs from their original design going into TBC and of course further improvements in the form of dual spec wrath.
So yes a design decision made in very early vanilla that simply didn’t play out well in TBC would be a perfect candidate for getting fixed in TBC Classic.
Your opinion
6561 is just a raw number. But how many of those “differences” are actually different? Your ability changing slightly. Or just having more/less crit realistically doesnt change your gameplay. Where as Dual wield arms mortal strike with sword spec and flurry is vastly different than 2h mortal strike arms
Im saying they arent the same which should be pretty evident
Its not that weapons are more or less special than skills. Its that weapons shouldnt be locked by a chosen spec. If your class is able to use a weapon (or was able to use a weapon previously) and they have arbitrarily disabled you from being able to use it just because of the spec you chose thats nonsensical
Just to be clear im just quoting you because im showing him what you (the OP) is arguing. Not that I feel like you have enough in you to have a logical argument
If you’re going to say something like that We could see the exact About you I don’t want it I don’t want it
not really.
also time is not on your side. each passing day with no dual spec is just more reason to wait til wrath classic.
This is actually a very interesting take and im wondering if it could be a solution or if its “different enough” to appease both sides. Providing that youd still need to respec if you wanted to participate in regular bgs (AB WSG EOTS AV) then youd still need to respec sometimes but not as often? Not sure how I feel about this idea. But its not bad. Gonna think on this
you can’t give them an inch.
no dual spec.
OK one I don’t agree with your assessment of the arguments for dual speck at all Do tell me how having dual speck in the game would stop having people doing heroics because seriously.
Is there more likely to cost you more gold than you make As far as people not using optimal specs yeah I want you to tell any good healer or tank that.
You cannot get away with heroic tanking or raid tanking Is with a hybrid speck especially if you’re a Is pallitank.
Like it or not you are 49/12 Is especially at early gear levels you need that survivability is that survivability just playing and simple You lose way too much if you vary off it.
Is the same thing with healers Yes there are certain variance that work better in PVP than PVE obviously.
However with something like a Druid If your resto your resto Is your a tree There’s nothing wrong with.
I don’t know having player freedom I think the opposite I think we have dual spec it’s going to increase player participation.
Because guess what I don’t know about you but I have never met a single person not is an old person not a single person in my 16 years of playing World of Warcraft that has ever said to me oh yeah I love farming.
It is always I have to And I know that because I have friends that used to do it constantly never once did they ever say to me oh yeah I love doing this no it’s always I have to do this.
So I still think it would increase participation because like it or not there’s a barrier to entry with either side pvp and pve And I hate to be one to say it but you really can’t get away with raid healing as a pdp speck.
And generally if you can the group is either one farming that content meaning nobody needs anything from it or 2 You’re just being carried through that’s like saying yeah you technically can you technically can go into kaera at 68 That doesn’t mean you should.
I want to see someone fury tank any heroic I want to see how long they last just I want to see It’s not going to do very well Is why because you need to respect and geared for it like it or not.
You call it lazy I call it common sense You can’t heal as a rat Trust me I’ve seen someone try it it doesn’t work very well Now yet you have a little bit more wiggle room as maybe a shadow priest but it’s not much.
But my point is if you’re going there for a roll you need need to be geared and spect for that role.
And I would make an argument yeah it would let people be able to farm out in the world a little bit better speaking as a Is a tank I can tell you it’s absolutely awful to quest and deform as a tank.
And that if you don’t have competition If you do well you might as well just fly around and try mining
Is plain and simple Oh and as far as thee Is it worked in wrath Not an argument that I would necessarily use because it’s an obvious fact.
stop saying “speck”. are you a troll or what. you’ve been told many times that it is not “speck”.
With that you include that the devs have no intention to listen to their player base. I mean, you can argue against it like you want, that still doesn’t change the fact that quite a lot of people want dual spec.
I don’t think you are in the position to think about my chances, as you have no clue how they are.
They do. There have been some clowns like you how reported this thread for example to trigger the auto ignore function. It was removed within 5 minutes by a mod.
Like you being against dual spec with what argument again? Oh right, you don’t have any but your opinion.
So again: Why are you against it when it has no negative impact on your gaming experience? For me there are only 3 reasons and none of it is legit!
I also wouldn’t be here with dual spec ingame, so what’s exactly your point? Forcing me into content I don’t enjoy to be able to do content I enjoy? Ehm, no!
Beside the fact that I am typing quite fast. 
When you think my arguments aren’t logical, you should consider if you are maybe just illogical!
Or maybe just a lack of empathy, because no empathetic person would argue against the wish of so many people, when it basically has no negative impact for themselves.
um - opinion is not bad faith. Misleading is. Twisting the argument, playing the man, intentionally misrepresenting views is. But in the absence of proof it is thoroughly reasonable to form logical but speculative opinions - so long as you’re not pretending to have proof where there is none.
I have engaged in this discussion is good faith and even changed my own views where the evidence dictated. So please don’t assume it’s okay to use deceptive sophistry just because you think you can point the finger back at me. Don’t pretend that somehow turning it back on me excuses you.
And that’s exactly what you’re pulling here - “this bad thing well you do it too so I’m okay”. Um nah, I don’t think I do do that and it doesn’t excuse you even if I do.
I actually think that I am especially a target of personal attacks precisely because I’m avoiding doing that myself. Being called all sorts of stuff and having my views completely mischaracterised, and no, I don’t think I am behaving like that myself - in spite of some people vigorously claiming that I am (without a scrap of evidence).
My arguments (which I’ve enumerated many many times now) are thus:
Dual spec simply isn’t needed and won’t solve many of the problems its proponents claim it will.
Dual spec runs directly counter to the explicit design goals of the original developers of TBC.
Dual spec allows people to solo more stuff in the world more efficiently thus removing incentive to group up.
Dual spec influences the way we run group encounters by giving a convenient option for optimising them, which risks further trivialising content.
Dual spec allows player to more efficiently grind through the slower grindier parts of the game allowing us to burn through content faster - where content delivery is already sparse and slow.
I’ve given other reasons too. When you come back and say I have no arguments I take that as bad faith given how many I have offered up.
As stated before I am not averse to change - I am in favour of accommodating arena as I think it would benefit the game to improve participation there in ways that enhance the original design of the game. The path of least harm to achieve the result then, in my view, is to have an arena spec (not a toggleable dual spec). Tat satisfies all of my previous objections - and yes, those objections are opinions not proven facts. Never claimed they were.
An example of bad faith is that you and your side see no grey here - you are not coming to this to “discuss” and there’s no compromise at all. You’re here to convince. And to cast dirt on those that get in your way. And it’s not us you’re trying to convince but the developers. You’re using a discussion forum as a petition platform.
I’m more than willing to discuss a compromise - if you are. I’ve offered one up even. But you’re not.
The original design intention of the game is important to me - it’s important to me that we don’t trash that legacy. Beyond that we have plenty of ground to talk compromise.
3 month old post with 15k views and 262 people agreeing with your original post. Yikes
It’s OK 1st off I don’t know what killed you’re looking at but I have never seen a palatin tank respect holy for Is night bane.
Sure the type of coordination and stuff that you’re talking about maybe the top 20% and yes dual speck allows it technically but it’s not needed.
Dull speck Nothing to do with the ease of content at all And as far as why you don’t see that the army of alts you’re talking about a lot more of a hardcore mine set there.
Yeah sure people that have a ton of already prepped and ready to go sure but how many gilts are really going to have that type of requirement agais requirement again the top 20%.
Is maybe the top 30 But no most skills are not going to do that the worst I can see happy is OK Is for certain boss bites you need to have 2 pve Is specs But having an army of alts to get the ultimate rate cop in every situation yeah that’s your top 20%.
And even then it’s almost not worth the trouble because then you have to organize who’s switching out what for X fight and then loot is kind of a problem because you have to be there for a kill to get credit.
Because what if you switch in an alt and well nothing drops for that character but the other character they switch out there was something good for it gives it just way too messy.
You aren’t forced to play the game as it was designed - you can in fact play other stuff.
But to expect the game design to be changed to conform to your own preferences is unreasonable. That is - to expect the game to operate against its own intended design goals. You’re basically exploiting the forums to attempt to hack the game when you attempt to petition for changes demonstrably counter design intent imo. Design intention is important. If a feature is not behaving as expected or if it could be improved great - suggest a change. But you’re basically saying you don’t like the way bits of the game were designed and think you deserve to have that design changed.
I personally don’t like being locked into a primary spec (through having to choose suboptimal talents to reach the capstone talent). But this is how it is designed to function and how it’s balanced. I won’t campaign against it. If a talent is broken or could be made more interesting I’ll push for that - as a discussion not a petition. But I won’t campaign for specs to not have capstones that lock you into a preference - even though I personally don’t like that design. If this were a new title with fresh content it would be a different story. But a “classic” version of the game should at least try to respect the work of the original developers and their intended design goals, in my view.
people have explained in detail why it will.
you have yourself acknowledged that the original designs were not perfect.
Dual spec doesn’t impact this.
except it doesn’t, there imply isn’t that much swing in requirements fight to fight.
they have already done that, people want dual spec for when they are at max level and are looking for random things to do.
Fine and I disagree with many of those retorts and have explained why previously. But the often repeated claim that I have not put forward a single reason as to why we shouldn’t have dual spec is patently wrong. At this point it is so obviously wrong as to be dishonest. And that is the claim I was responding to.
You can claim that you don’t accept my reasons, and you can claim they’re not convincing. But to claim I haven’t given reasons is verging on gaslighting. And that is what the person I responded to was claiming.
And you are simply wrong. People have explained in detail why you are wrong about why they want dal spec and how they will use. As for how it impacts encounters, you are free to explain why, you refuse to do so.