Dual spec please

Whether or not I want dual spec isn’t contingent upon how fun I think it would be.

Dual spec is a pretty cool feature. You clearly miss the point.

You didn’t really list all of them, and honestly some of the ones you listed were quite convincing, if worded very poorly and in a biased way because it’s clear where you stand.

There’s no reason to act with such animosity on this subject, we all know they aren’t going to add it, were just discussing the merit of a hypothetical TBC with dual spec. I’m all for it in a TBC season of mastery, tbh. Just not the “authentic reliving” of it.

Its okay, TBC isnt for everybody. If you want dual specs youre in that group.

1 Like

Why? If you think something would improve the game and make it more fun, you don’t think that it should be added?

Because #nochanges right?

This isn’t a re-creation of original tbc. That went out the window when they added a paid level 58 boost that bots have been abusing since it was implemented. Same faction bg’s have removed any incentive to switch to alliance for pvp. Arena rating changes have destroyed pvp participation.

These are game breaking changes that have fundamentally altered the way the game is played and they should have never went in.

Adding dual spec at this point can only help the game. Are we worried that the dwindling player base is going to throw a fit and quit because they can swap specs without paying 50g every time?

#somechanges isnt an argument for dual specs.

5 Likes

Like I said, there are 2 conditions to fulfill, not just one.

Is it fun/helpful to the players? Sure.

Does it maintain a proper, authentic-ish feel to original TBC, or attempt to balance out outlier variables that didn’t exist back then? Absolutely not.

Changes they’ve made already adhere to this duality, such as the drums changes, feral energy changes.

Some changes they’ve made don’t, like the one-time-per-account boosts or the arena rating changes.

So yes, this leads to a circumstance where I feel both things, that it is a neat feature that’d be fun to have, but simultaneously do not believe it is appropriate to implement in to TBCC.

Personally I do not identify with the argument that the game is “dying” and dual spec will “save” it to begin with.

You could basically make this sort of justification for many other changes at the same time, you’re opening the flood gates but think you’re being reasonable by stopping at, of all things, a WOTLK feature that was later removed for something “better”.

Why not retail spec? What’s to stop LFR or LFD from being a thing?

2 Likes

Well it’s good that I have clearly explained why dual spec would improve the game several different times on this post.

The reason blizz gave when they added it in wotlk was to make it easier to swap between content. Tbc classic pvp participation is in the toilet therefore adding dual spec to improve pvp participation makes sense.

And I didn’t resort to a simple argument “well it wasn’t in original tbc so it can’t go in tbc classic” which is essentially every one of your arguments against it.

And when you consider the other major changes blizz has already made, your “it wasn’t in original tbc” argument loses weight. There are a lot of things in tbc classic that weren’t in original tbc. This isn’t a #somechanges argument to support dual spec, this is pointing out that blizz has set a precedent and is willing to change the game.

Pvp participation rates clearly show that section of the game is not doing well. Dual spec was added in wotlk with the stated reason,” to make it easier for players to swap between the content they enjoy.”

I think dual spec helps improve pvp participation which is not a good spot right now. Nowhere am I asking for any other changes. Dual spec is a minor quality of life change. LFR and LFD fundamentally alter the way the game is played.

Your opinion on what you think dual specs adds to the game is irrelevant. All you get with dual specs is dual specs. Whether its an improvement or not is subject to individual interpretation - I dont need to take your word for it.

All you’re saying is Blizz set a precedent with other changes and by virtue of that dual specs should go in. Thats not how it works. Dual specs are their own thing and need their own reason to make them necessary for their inclusion and so far the players advocating for them cant do that, yourself included.

Your logic is #allchanges. Since Blizz already made changes that means no change is off the table. Obviously Blizz doesnt agree.

3 Likes

I have clearly explained why “I think” dual spec would improve the game. I have linked the blue post when dual spec was added into the game several times.

I am of the opinion that the addition of dual spec would help improve pvp participation by making it easier to swap between content. I cannot make it any clearer. I have had several friends not do arenas because they don’t want to deal with the respec fees.

That is NOT what I am saying. I am saying YOUR reason for not adding it into the game doesn’t hold weight. Your #1 reason against it is “it wasn’t in original tbc” well several other things are in tbc classic that weren’t in original tbc. I am not using the changes to support my argument. I am using them to point out that your position doesn’t make sense.

Your argument would be better if you clearly stated the reasons dual spec would hurt the game or why it wouldn’t improve the game and not “welp it wasn’t in original tbc so it’s a no from me dawg.” Blizz obviously is not of the same opinion that if it wasn’t in original tbc it can’t be added to tbc classic.

They also aren’t of the opinion that every single idea that potentially creates a hypothetical “improved TBC” is somehow automatically guaranteed to get added in just because it has no foreseeable drawbacks to you, personally.

So you need to actually make an effort to understand why Blizzard wouldn’t implement it, because as far as it goes, it seems very likely that this will end up being the case.

This can’t be described as anything other than sheer laziness. It can’t be overstated how simple it is to make respec gold with all the dailies already available and we’re only going to get more added.

1 Like

Never said they were. I believe DUAL SPEC would improve tbc pvp participation. I never even said I think they’ll add it. If I had to bet, I would bet it’s not coming until wotlk classic.

I have taken the time to consider the drawbacks, have you?

The only one I’ve seen that actually holds weight is “hardcore guilds will make me have two raiding specs now”. An issue that would affect like 5% or less of players.

I would love to here your reasons it shouldn’t be added other than “authentic original tbc experience” or “it wasn’t in tbc”. Try reasons that actually affect gameplay like “friends avoiding arenas because they don’t want to pay 100g every time they queue.”

Do you think that’s the reason Blizzard hasn’t implemented it yet?

For the record I’ve expressed acceptance to the idea of an “arena spec” before, in TBCC, assuming PvP is your only gripe.

1 Like

I think they have a skeleton team working on tbc classic and don’t have time to consider these kind of changes. Communication, bugs, bots and several other issues make me believe the “only one intern working on the game” jokes. I may be wrong and they may have already had this entire forum discussion in their offices and decided it’s not coming.

Same faction bg’s (something I opposed) took months before they were added into the game. Even though I was against it, it has helped save pvp participation. The hour long queues lasted months and had people quitting in droves.

Pvp is my only gripe and honestly, this late in the expansion it probably wouldn’t even help that much.

I just have a hard time seeing the negatives, other than my hardcore guild example.

As many people have told you every time you make some irrelevant strawman argument, if you genuinely want those things features then go make a thread about them.

1 Like

I don’t.

I would also post in a thread about those, fervently against their addition.

It’s not a strawman argument, I’m just asking a question based off the premise of one of the main arguments coming from your side.

One of the main arguments is “They said #somechanges so dual spec can be added”.

Okay, so then why not all changes? Why not this, or that, or the other thing?

The idea is to demonstrate some kind of actual guideline here for what does or doesn’t make sense, and constantly repeating “some changes” does not illustrate such a thing.

To rephrase, #somechanges is not an argument for dual spec.

2 Likes

Its literally the same argument as hurr durr why not demon hunters???

The reason I am asking for dual spec and not demon hunters is because I want dual spec, not demon hunters. The same thing applies to LFR, I never argued for it because I didn’t want it or think the game needed it.

Guess what, other people did and now it’s in the game, its called the current state of T5 content and probably T6 when it comes out.

Wow, it sure looks like people can get the changes they want in the game if they’re loud enough. At least dual spec wont impact people negatively the same way T5 nerfs literally deleted the content I wanted to do from the game.

1 Like

Yes, you are correct lol

Both dual spec and demon hunters sit in the same absurd tier of things to add to TBCC (for me).

Okay so then this is mostly just about…saying things we wish we could have in some kind of strange utopia TBC for people who are unhappy with the way things used to be?

If that’s the case, you know, go ahead and day dream all day, don’t let me spoil your fun.

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeh…what changes are you referring to here? In each case (with changes that actually happened), the thing people were being loud over were…well…game-breaking and potentially meta-centralizing stuff.

Dual spec is merely a convenience for people who are…I’m sorry to use the term, but…lazy.

I was against the nerfs too. Very disappointing.

2 Likes

Of course it isn’t. It just destroys most of the arguments against it.

Do people want that? I’ve seen no posts asking for it. In fact many people claimed the changes to the talents in Cata, MoP etc was the main reason they quit. There were several long threads during classic where people talked about the difference between retail and classic and why they quit. Not one person in all those posts said they quit because dual spec was added. Where were you then? Why didn’t you and the others against dual spec cite that as a reason you quit in those threads?

1 Like

The only reason people stop at dual spec is because WOTLK is…relatively adjacent to TBC in terms of era.

As a result, most people probably inherently believe in their minds “retail spec would be way too far”, under the idea that dual spec is only a small step.

However, when contrasted with a lot of arguments that people use for dual spec, it all equally applies to the modern retail spec system.

(hurts nobody, helps participation and login activity, etc).

The same argument could be made for LFR and LFD, and they were also Wrath features, and I have seen people ask for that.

The problem is that they are all non-starter to begin with.