No, it is a fact. Whatever your hang-ups with Retail, you have to actually name them. Just referencing Retail writ-large is lazy and silly. No one knows what you’re talking about.
By this logic, no iteration of the game has ever allowed any class to have more than 4-5 builds. Also you’re proving my point about how hilariously silly the “choice” is in current Talent trees.
If the only way you can justify calling it a different spec is because of weapon choice/type, then Vanilla, TBC, etc are still more restrictive and less interesting than any MoP or later version of the game.
“How is this different.”
“Just is.”
Neat.
…why?
My Druid has learned and unlearned Swiftmend a dozen times or more because Reasons™ but if my Druid learned and unlearned Fist Weapons that would be too much?
You do know that Shaman have to specialize with talents into Dual Wield right? It is one of their 31pt Enhancement talents. They also have to specialize with talents to even learn how to Parry.
Sooooo what are you talking about?
LOL? Some changes completely defeats this position. You can demand this, but authenticity for the sake of authenticity has sailed a long time ago.
Trying to modify a no-changes argument into this just means you’re still trying to desperately reserve a sacred part of TBC that can’t be touched… which the Devs have flatly said is not going to be the case.
I’m going to go off on a limb here and assume he didn’t know this.
Funny thing is, Enhancement didn’t used to work this way. Originally, respeccing from Enhancement and losing those talents meant you lost all the weapon skill increases that went with it (meaning you had to increase the skill again if you ever specced Enhancement again).
Unlike the others he actually tries to put a scintilla of substance, which makes it fun to pick apart since he doesn’t actually have a cogent argument, he just wants his want to be the rule.
I mean he’s seriously trying to argue that not being able to DW as Arms in Retail is some grand slight against the creativity and fun of the Warrior class… when literally all Kebab does is play like a Fury Warrior with Mortal Strike instead of Bloodthirst. Without looking at debuffs, you couldn’t tell Kebab and Fury apart otherwise.
They are so fixated on superficial reskins of minimal choices.
Yeah that was rough. You’d literally have to regrind your skill over and over if you swapped. Had such mechanics stayed in the game then most of these anti-Dual Spec folks would have a leg to stand on because such big penalties really do make specs a bit more concrete and important…
Almost like Blizzard was already trying to make the ability to swap a more fluid and pain free experience before we even hit Wrath…
Some of the polls were still open at the time I checked them.
And yes I voted twice, because they were IP locked per vote.
I voted on my wifi home internet and from cellular service internet this is how I found out it was IP locked for those polls.
This means I could use a VPN and bot to change my IP, vote, change my ip vote, exc. For hundreds of votes per minute.
Blizzard polls are a little different but still abuseable because they use your account per vote. All you need to make an account is an email address. So make hundreds of emails, make accounts with them, use those accounts to have 8 accounts attached to them (I think 8 is the limit still) and vote with all of them. All of this is doable with a bot. Heck one if my friends did this when he was learning to code for when blizzard did the faction mount poll for WoD (I think k it was wod, I could be wrong on the exact expansion they did this for). He made 10 email accounts using a bot that used those accounts to sign up for wow accounts and voted on the poll… after he got it working he left it running for a few minutes and added over 400 votes to horde with his bot.
It’s a nice departure from Riger and Zipzo, I guess?
Not sure what drives that, although I’m guessing it’s clinical aspect of some of our writing.
I particular stay away from the “in my opinion” disclaimers for that very reason–a way of projecting yourself through some kind of safety net so you can say whatever you want without fear of reprisal.
What’s really funny is when you see people who are “arguing” live-stream themselves searching for some excuse to justify their feelings on a particular matter which just goes to show they haven’t thought any of this through.
You can see some of this in real-time as these folks respond almost immediately to posts and you can tell they haven’t done any due thought after reading your responses. Riger in particular doesn’t read anything anyone ever posts ever. He gives the semblance of it, but the fact that he doesn’t recall instances of previous conversations shows he doesn’t know how to have a conversation.
This is what the “Twitter” types of social interactions do to people. They don’t know how to respond to people. Responding to people is more than just cherry-picking a couple of words they use and responding to those. What did the person actually say?
I think their strategy, overall, is that if you’re bad at formulating an argument you just keep going at it until those who disagree with you quit out of exhaustion.
I’m not even sure they have an end-goal. They’ve decided “here be the line” and they’re going to rabble-rouse for it til they’re blue in the face. If we get Dual Spec added out of nowhere going into T6 content, I fully expect the following responses:
See! This proves that Blizzard held off for a reason! We weren’t wrong to oppose and call you all entitled brats!!
Activision FAIL listening to this minority of losers…
Meh, I didn’t care anyway, I just made sure to tell everyone in favor of the change they were stupid and dumb and shouldn’t be listened to
What I don’t get is the concept of “winning” anything on this topic. People make requests, Blizzard doesn’t respond, so the request is still live. The bound and determined insistence that every day without Dual Spec is some vindication is just so very sad.
The end goal is to justify the original feeling they had. Somehow.
That’s the thing about coming at any subject-matter from emotional subjectivity. Even when presented with logic or rational thinking, the onus us to talk your way out of it somehow. That’s a lot of what Riger does. He constantly squeezes out ream after ream of nonsense all in a grand effort to talk himself to in agreeing with his original presumption.
Because it’s not enough for a disagreement to simply be a disagreement. It’s about sanitation. Effectively, no different than when folks here false-flag other people’s posts. The objective is to get the people they disagree with banned or censored.
The objective is to shut people up, to get them to stop talking about whatever it is they’re talking about so that only one voice remains.
Notice how Solotov has very little to say about Dual Spec other than that our opinions on it are wrong. Same with quite a few others who latch on to authenticity without readily describing what that is or how that can even stand amidst a #SomeChanges environment.
It simply means they haven’t examined their own perspectives on the matter.
“If I don’t agree with your perspective, then obviously that means you shouldn’t have one.”
These people don’t seem to realize–even if they say so–that our perspectives on the matter don’t necessarily invalidate theirs. People are still free to like or dislike whatever they want.
The problem therein is that you and I have reasons behind our likes and dislikes that go beyond our personal feelings on the matter.
I think the “winning” terminology has been jacked ever since the Charlie Sheen memes of 2011. Even Donald Trump frequently used the term, as if electoral politics were on the same level as a sporting event. Another phrase I’ve seen people bandy about is, “Take the L” or some variation of such.
I’ve said this multiple times only to have a “well obviously, but still…” response come flying out anyway.
I’ve used this a few times, but usually when someone comes in full of vim and vigor with some insanely hostile take, gets a mild amount of pushback, and then frothingly disappears in a huff. They always come off like Billy Madison when he first gets to high school making dumb quips and everyone just glares at him… but without being kinda lovable like Sandler is in that movie.
Because they still fundamentally disagree with it that sentiment. It’s why folks use underhanded tactics like false-flagging posts that they disagree with or yell “Troll!” on a throwaway alt when someone disagrees with them.
It’s the contradictory nature of these replies. The phrase “people are still free to like or dislike whatever they want” is common enough to be a slogan. It’s a slogan that people are afraid of tackling straightforwardly without reprisal, so they’ll do workarounds where they say, “I agree, but…” and proceed into a ream of commentary about why they disagree.
And they refuse to acknowledge the contradiction afterwards. The refusal to acknowledge contradictions or hypocrisy is all about dialectics. Community organizers are particularly good at this.
Acknowledgement that Blizzard uses polling data. Which means Blizzard trusts the data they collect, otherwise they wouldn’t continue to use it. Regardless of how easy you think the data collection is to abuse, the people collecting the data still trust it.
And you’re still lying, by the way.
Delimicus made sure he provided sources to not one or two, but several different polls. This is done to minimize bias and weigh the results in order to make them more representative of the overall population. So, while it’s generally correct that a single poll may not be completely representative of the population but it does help increase the chances of the results representing the overall population.
So, like Riger, are you just going to be another person who selectively reads other peoples’ posts or ignores information other people have put forward.
Going to re-quote what I said in response to this:
Want me to re-post what I already posted a third time?
Why is it hard for you to understand that the company in question apparently disagrees with you because they use polls all the time to procure their data.
I watched a friend of mine fly like superman while flapping his arms.
Yes, it is impossible for any poll to be 100% free of bias.
Little things from the incentives and influences of the questionnaire writer to the words used to various forms of sampling bias can negatively impact results when a questionnaire is distributed to hundreds of users.
Not all bias is preventable, but there are a few key areas and best practices you can use to prevent bias.
All of those polls were open sourced to not require a form of invitation to vote
They were IP based.
It is easy to change your IP and vote again and again with a VPN.
Even with blizzard polls they are account based. It costs nothing to make a wow account. You can make hundreds of thousands of accounts with a bot program and vote with them. Again, I watched my friend do this to an official blizzard poll, he is a programmer as his career.
