As long as you continue to end your posts with ad hominem like this, youāre forever the absolute child in this thread, at least Ziryus doesnāt do this, for as irritating and impervious to logic as he is.
Your logic for āThatās at least 1 more tankā doesnāt track and this argument has been dispelled prior, has nothing to do with ignoring it or āscreechingā at people who say theyād tank if they had dual spec.
We know it does not fix the tank shortage, regardless of if Rosamoon becomes a regular tank in dungeons after the addition of dual spec. That Rosamoon will make their 2nd spec a tank spec, and once in a while be a tank that runs a dungeon does not justify hurting the authenticity of the product, and game experience for all of us who expect what we were sold.
Letās say we rationalize the ātank problemā in terms of queue time.
Do you really think reducing the duungeon queue time (very little of the population runs dungeon anymore either) from 1 hour down to 59 minutes is somehow a banger argument to those of us who are passionate about keeping the game as authentic as we can?
Now if dual spec verifiably had as wild an effect as on queue times or ātank finding timeā as same faction queues does for horde BGs, then maybe I could at least see the logic, but at the same time you need to look at the pools here. The people still needing dungeon runs that are sitting in queue looking for a tank are such a minority, as are the people who desperately need this feature for PvP. Even Blizzard made the point specifically about there not being nearly enough PvPers to justify going against the design philosophy, and thatās likely true today.
Will it improve some peopleās experience. Yes. Just like taking away currency altogether and giving people infinite gold would improve someoneās experience.
Does that mean itās worth implementing? No.
Again, not always is someone being helped a good argument for something being changed.
Have you considered the the trouble finding a tank is actually sort of a built in design element? It makes you have to get to know people who tank, friend them, build relationships, so you have people to call on in an MMO. I know that when I was playing other classes, I basically would spark up fun conversations with tanks I thought were good, and end the run on a friendly note, so that I could ask them to tank later, and weād have a lot of fun running lots of dungeons in a row when the times lined up.
Thatās at the heart of what the older MMO experience should be about. What you want is an easier āget in and get outā experience, which is what the new WoW is like, and none of us want, an essentially solo-experience with nothing but a sea of random faces who you will never play with again.
WoW very intentionally from day one of vanilla tried not to be an old school MMO.
Do you like not losing EXP when you die? Do you like not dropping your gear when you die? Do you like that you can solo to max level? Do you like quest based leveling instead of grinding?
That WoW made modifications to the formula to be āeasierā on MMO players of the time, doesnāt mean the 2005-2007 versions of WoW are not antiquated by todayās standards.
You see thereās this thing called time. A lot of it has passed since Vanilla/TBC.
Because I have nostalgia for the characters and original versions of Warcraft/World of Warcraft?
Also I never played EQ, I have no historical connection to it.
I have played games that dent your XP when you die, Iāve played games where you drop gear when you die, Iāve played games where you have to grind a lot outside of minimal quests, and Iāve played games where grouping is essential throughout the leveling experience.
None of those things bother me, but that they donāt bother me is irrelevant to this discussion. You have a real issue with going completely out on tangential nothings that are irrelevant to the topic: āPlz add dual spec blizzā. This is a feature-beg topic.
Iām only here to remind you that your time is probably better utilized elsewhere because of the unlikelihood of it happening.
Iām sure youāll keep posting regardless, and more power to you, but I donāt really feel any inclination to stop letting you know itās not coming either, soā¦shrug
No, thatās what happens when I am half asleep when I reply to something. I honestly missed the priest vs mage part.
Regardless you can do all those things now. It just requires you to play the game.
If you want to have multiple roles without having to respec, make more alts.
Iām leveling a paladin specifically to tank.
I have a hunter for being a dps and pvp. Iāll pay the respecs on him as itās easily affordable to respec twice a week.
And I just donāt like healing so Iām not going to level a healer.
And dual spec wonāt make more tanks overall. Or more healer. We saw this in wotlk already. History shows dual spec doesnāt really do anything for the issue.
The multitude of changes blizzard gas made to encourage people to tank proves this.
Dual spec was added, still about an hour wait for relevant content
Tanking aggro was made brain dead
Loot bags for tanks
Tanking was attempted to be made more fun by giving more CDs to rotate and be reactive with
Gear was made to change specs with you so you didnāt need to farm new gear to tank
Talents were reworked into the trispec version if retail
Exc. I know Iām missing one or two things but even with all of this. There is still a tank shortage. Because itās a player made problem that breaks down to choices.
In-game situations can effect those choices. Like raid makeup usually using only about 2 tanks, then about 5-8 healers and then 15ish dps. Which means the high end of content requires far less tanks than both dps and healers. But dungeon make up is a 1:1:3 of tank healer dps. This means many dungeon tanks end up being raid dps/healer or not getting in raid. Which also makes people not want to focus on being a tank even if they liked the gameplay of it.
History shows dual spec didnāt really have an impact in the tank shortages.
People who dont want dual specs dont need to explain themselves to you. The product already exists in the flavor they like it, thereās no need to validate what is already the reigning paradigm. Its here, in its current state, for a reason.