In addition to this, making the money to respec requires such trivial effort that anyone who honestly complains about it is immediately outing themselves as people who barely play the game as it stands…so why exactly would Blizzard feel compelled to cater to those types of players?
2 Likes
If it requires such a trivial effort it’s not much of a deterrent to respeccing and adding dual spec is merely a trivial qol change. You can’t logically have it both ways. It can’t be a trivial effort to pay to respec and a major change in game play when the trivial respec cost is eliminated
1 Like
When you know that something is not much different to the other thing why change it?
See, this is what is being missed. YOU are building the case for change. YOU have to establish grounds for why.
Building a case and rejecting a case are not equivalent goals.
“I don’t like it” is sufficient reason to reject it. “I like it” is not sufficient reason to add it. It can be a reason to consider it though.
3 Likes
I mean when his most compelling reason for adding dual spec is that anyone who doesn’t agree with his agenda of adding it is a liar…
1 Like
Well, that the effort is trivial is technically just my opinion. Clearly it isn’t trivial for everyone, and that’s honestly the [current] spec system doing exactly what it’s supposed to do, locking the lazy people out of getting everything they want.
You’re being filtered, and that’s actually kind of the whole point.
1 Like
Because we think it will improve the game with no down side. We’ve explained how many times. Here is one way it improves a game that is focused on groups to complete content when it’s already difficult to find those groups.
The downside is that it makes TBCC less like TBC, and it reduces spec value, explained exactly as the blues back then stated.
I don’t care if you call that a #nochanges argument, it’s still a legitimate concern when the aim of the product is to be like an already transpired and known product.
Are you attempting to imply that the blues back then were simply wrong about their reasons for not adding it?
2 Likes
I’ve already outlined that from my own experience in Wrath I don’t believe it will achieve any of those things. It won’t meaningfully alleviate Tank shortages.
It gives you precisely two choices. As we discovered two isn’t enough.
Some will spec a PvP spec others a supplemental spec in the same role (trash clearing versus single target etc…).
If the goal is to alleviate Tank shortage we already know that a more flexible talent system combined with role adaptive gear would be needed.
My argument (which you ignored) was that the retail talent system would be better for the goals you present. I don’t think dual spec is fit for purpose. It was tried and it failed (that’s why it got replaced).
What’s funny is, you keep raising these same point and my reply hasn’t changed. You claim I never gave a reply and of course that’s demonstrably false.
Some might argue that doing this hasn’t even helped in retail, where…that’s exactly how it is today.
1 Like
No, I think he is saying the blues back then lied. They don’t agree with him so clearly they lied.
1 Like
Filthy liars!!
I always include evidence to back up my claims. Did you not claim you could do 2-3 dailies in and average of about 10 minutes? Did you not drop that claim withing hours when several people said they did not believe you? Are you not now claiming you can do 2 in about 10 minutes? Why have you dropped the claim you can do 2-3 dailies in an average of about 10 minutes?
You’re the only one I’ve seen posting here that claimed the original devs lied. Did you claim that the original devs would have banned multiboxing but didn’t only because the technology wasn’t available? Why have you stopped making that claim? Do you still believe the original devs wanted to ban multiboxing but didn’t only because the technology was available? How do you explain the numerous blue posts from 15 years ago defending the use of multiboxing and input broadcasting software? If the devs wanted to ban multiboxing all those posts by the devs defending it are lies. Are you lying or were the original devs lying? It’s either you or them.
Please explain how the change from 1500 starting points to zero starting points in arena meets that aim? Could it be that your interpretation of that aim is different from blizzard’s interpretation?
And I’ve already outlined that from my own experience in Wrath that it did help. You can’t possible have had experience of every server in wrath and neither can I. But it helped on the servers I played on. It didn’t make much difference for my holy priest but for my dps alts it was an improvement
As I said in my post
That means there are other ways not immediately mentioned in the post. People adding a pvp spec is another way dual spec improves the game. Especially in Classic BC with the low numbers of people playing arena.
Thus why I changed my view about 3 months ago and support an arena spec that toggles active when you enter arena (a Loadout).
I think arena is a valid use-case (stated many times before as you know).
The thing is, I don’t think dual spec is an effective solution to the problems you outline but I support efforts to suggest solutions that would be effective.
In fact if the discussion focussed more on presenting problems and proposing solutions it would be a whole lot less toxic.
I never dropped the claim, you have refused to even accept any evidence I brought up.
I don’t need to do the orgrala quests or skygaurd any more and I’m not hurting for gold so I stopped doing them. The fishing daily and cooking daily get me raid food while I do them so there’s no reason to not do them as I would be farming what they provide anyway.
Also you seem to think “about 10 minutes” means exactly 10 minute average.
I do my dailies when there is little to no competition so even when doing the bomb dailies they would only take a few minutes at most
I have it min maxed for doing the dailies quickly, from engineer teleporter, fast flying, riding crop, precooked food, exc.
But no, clearly I am a liar right?
Wwwwwoooooossssshhhhh
I said it was a possibility, not an absolute, and it was based on my opinion.
Blizzard themselves have said that technology constraints were part of the reason some things were the way they were back then
So in your opinion it’s possible the original devs lied when they defended multiboxing and input broadcasting software and hardware often and in a clear and detailed way. Do you think it’s possible they told more lies on other subjects? You’re the only one here that I’ve seen who claimed the original devs might be lying.
They didn’t lie about them viewing it as acceptable, when you make rules, one of the considerations behind those rules is how it will be enforced.
If a rule is deemed to expensive and time consuming to be enforced it may be deemed easier to just not make something against the rules and is thus an acceptable action.
I’m not saying they lied in their posts, that is words you are trying to force on me. I’m saying part of the reason they made their decision to allow it, was likely that they did not see it as an option to stop it at the time due to technology constraints, cost vs reward, exc. They didn’t have a good way of detecting the 3rd party software back then, which means it would have likely to have been done by a person(s) instead of an automated system, which isn’t cost effective.
They didn’t lie, because I’m not saying their conclusion on multiboxing was them lieing, I’m saying they may have reach a different conclusion if they had today’s technology back then, specifically the ability to detect and identity who is using specific third party software.