You’re welcome to think that, I disagree. You can think (and say) I’m wrong, but don’t pretend I haven’t fully articulated my position and why.
1 Like
Articulating your position doesn’t mean it can’t be wrong 
For example you have stated that it would somehow change raiding, but can’t explain how.
2 Likes
Another lie - I have l outlined at length tens of times over numerous threads that you were part of and responded to - how it potentially impacts encounters.
It is utterly frustrating to write reams on this over many days and have the retort - “you never outlined how”.
I have many many times and rather than disagree with it you claim it never was said.
I.E - I think people will optimise their specs for specific encounters - based on the fact many top guilds did so when Dual Spec released. And the fact that classic has had a pattern of min maxing among the more average player base. I don’t want to waste more time breaking that down when I know that within an hour in this thread or another you will come back with “but you never said why”.
Have I proof? No I don’t - it’s my opinion and you’re free to disagree. But don’t gaslight me and say I never gave a view or that I was evasive.
Use the search.
1 Like
Explain in detail exactly how dual spec changes raiding, not a vague well people will use dual spec in raids.
Oh and you have to explain how any changes are negative as well.
2 Likes
Who ever suggested that?
Of course I might be wrong - that’s why we discuss. So might you. But don’t completely fabricate that I haven’t fully articulated a clear position.
1 Like
Search the forums. I have no inclination to offer you arguments I have already given you numerous times. If I detail it out with examples and explanations like I have many times in the past - you’ll accuse me of using too much text to obfuscate the point and then later claim I never explained. Utterly intellectually dishonest.
Meanwhile you don’t put your own claims to the same test do you? Detailed proofs with fully explained examples and cross references? And yet if I don’t reach an academic level of proof you claim I haven’t even tried to make an argument or a case - utter BS.
4 Likes
You should do that, you’ll find why all your actual reasons are junk.
Oh right but you don’t listen when people explain why they personally have explained how the lack of dual spec impacts them.
2 Likes
They may be junk - but they exist - so, can we at least stop pretending they don’t?
-
You saying over and over that I haven’t put forward a case does not make it true.
-
You saying over and over that I support #nochanges does not make it true.
-
No doubt you will now claim that I am doing all this stuff too (as you have done previously when we get to this point) - that does not make it true.
You are not operating in this discussion in good faith at all. It’s all traps and tricks and misinformation.
In fact even here - you claim my opinions are junk but don’t explain why. You claim to have done so in the past, which is fine but - double standards much? You don’t hold yourself to the standard you hold me to. Now - I don’t expect you to answer why as you have already done so in the past - you’re still entitled to disagree with or without reasons. But that’s the standard you apply to me, you are requiring me to re articulate my reasons completely and with detailed evidence every single time you demand it, over and over. A summary of my position is not enough for you and if I don’t deliver on every occasion you demand it you claim that I have never offered a view. It’s an absolute trick and you are fully wasting my time.
If your standard were fair I would accept we should keep that standard even if you don’t. But it’s not a fair standard - it’s a herring. Noone should be expected to repeatedly write essays of proven justification in order to be deemed to hold an opinion on an informal discussion forum. That is not a reasonable expectation - it’s a hurdle you set up to muscle opponents out of the discussion.
I listen - and I have replied and acknowledged it giving reasons why I have my doubts about it. Again I’m not denying people have that view - I’m disagreeing with it.
That’s argument - I address the point but I don’t have to agree with it. What you’re doing in claiming the view was never expressed is gaslighting.
It’s got to the point where people will take me to task over a position I’ve never held based on you and others inventing that I hold that position. Take #nochanges as an example. You’ve even claimed that I owned up to that position in other threads just moments after I expressly took you to task on it and rejected that view.
No wonder people think I’m contradicting myself when you are constantly portraying me as holding views I don’t hold even in discussions where I’m not actively involved - you’ve gone so far as to name me and claim I admit to a position I don’t hold. It’s Orwellian stuff. I’m pretty jack of these cheap tactics to be honest.
The forums are completely unmoderated and awash with absolute BS and misrepresentations.
5 Likes
quite a lot of people want a lot of things.
1 Like
Does he think the blizzard employee who might possibly be reading this stuff can’t see through his intellectual dishonesty too? lol
2 Likes
Do you think they can’t see the actual numbers behind the scenes which lead to introducing dual spec in the first place?
2 Likes
On the contrary I think it’s a great feature, but it doesn’t belong in tbc.
Tbcc should have changes made that go directly against the design goals and intent of tbc.
They didn’t have Is Guild banks or sainfaction battlegrounds at launch either and here we are.
So there’s no reason for me to think that dual speck isn’t possible Maybe not in this phase maybe we have to wait till phase 3 but I’m still gonna keep trying no matter what.
Right so all you have is #nochanges.
3 Likes
I am #nochangesthatgodirectlyagaistthedesigngoalsandintentoforigionaltbc.
The devs of the day specifically said no to the concept of dual spec and gave their reasons why. This isn’t a “did they just not get to this change or not have a need for it back then” type of reasoning.
The demand was there, and they addressed it. With a “no”.
You are trying to push a change that goes against the core design goals and intent of said design goals. What is the point of a classic game if there is no respect given at all to the orogional game?
If Diablo 2 resurrected was changed to have the maps and monsters if D2 but the gameplay, talent system, items, inventory, exc all got changed to D3 version, then is that really D2 any more?
I’ll say this again.
Stop trying to turn this pie into a cake.
The thing is any argument you make against Dulce back could easily just be flipped because a lot of the things that you’re stating are all opinion based.
I don’t think dull speck is going to allow people to solo more content Is will it let healers and tanks have an off spec to do quests easier.
Of course but that doesn’t mean they’re gonna go for a not build a solo a group quest to be on the solo every single group quest that requires 5 people.
Secondly I don’t see how it really hurts the core design of tbc.
You still have to get groups For heroics and dungeons that fact hasn’t changed It doesn’t make rating easier or harder if you can’t solo a boss without dual speck you’re not going to kill it well.
Sure maybe maybe it may become meta but realistically that’s going to be the competitive top maybe 20%.
All I see dual spectwing is letting people have access to more content there’s enough barrier to entry to PVP as is.
And there doesn’t need to be any more And again I stayed The points that you pointed out are opinionated.
I could say the same 2 things just reversed I think dual specs going to increase people plain more because they are going have more available to them.
I think it’s going to put the idea of people trying out tanking because now they have an option To do so.
It also Allows you to help your friends in my opinion because if you’re let’s say you’re a healer alt but there’s already healer in the group OK I have my DPS off speck.
And the list goes on for me I don’t see how Dulce back really hurts the core design of tbc.
So just a hypocritical #nochanger now that blizzard has abandoned #nochanges.
3 Likes
I can, or I just ask them to implement this little thing making it easy to avoid the content I don’t like and focus on the content I want to play.
And there are obviously a lot of people who agree with that. You might remember that dual spec came for a reason with Wrath. Why do you think was that? Because the player base didn’t want it? Or maybe because they kept asking for it since classic?
When you are just half as smart as you’d like to be, you will get the answer and stop posting such pointless wall of texts!!!
And like 5 disagree, so a great quote I would say. The view count results in you posting 50 times a day. I am wondering: When you enjoy the game so much that you don’t want it to be changed, what are you doing here?
Will he get that it was a rhetorical question?
1 Like
Lol. Faction BG’s had an entire, more populous faction which is favored by blizzard whining for it. what do you noobs have? A bunch of nobodies from a loud, tiny minority posting on alts? Yeah, great chances there.
2 Likes
Of course - as are all the points people are making in favour of dual spec.
We each then weigh up the merits of each persons position for our selves and draw our own conclusions. These are not provable assertions - on either side. So, we make our own assessments based on the logic and fair considerations of the case. It’s not a crime to disagree ;p