Let’s just hope they don’t leave the starting price at 1k gold. I prob spent like 20k gold on dual spec just to have them lower it to 100g. Lol ultimately it doesn’t matter cuz u can make 1k easily but still lol
Why do you keep endlessly going on and on about multiboxing?
It’s a completely different topic and bears no weight on the subject of dual spec, seriously, nobody is buying it.
Multiboxing is not an in-game feature that was added in any expansion.
40 men raid doesn’t really need DS, and some classes in vanilla PVP are OK with PVE spec. We also had fury-prot. Vanilla 5m dungeons are also easy, can be done in any spec.
To clarify, TBC game is more serious than SOM. People expect correct spec in anything we do. The 25m raid with strict comp doesn’t allow inefficient gameplay. Everyone must be in the correct spec, else no invite or loot. TBC has arena game mode requiring strict PVP talent. TBC also has 5m heroic that requires correct talent.
Basically, TBC requires a lot of respec if you play all the contents. I do want them to cap respec at 20g. SOM doesn’t have DS is irrelevant because it doesn’t need. TBC on the other hand need a cheaper respec option to promote more participation.
Lmao. Here be dragons.
1 Like
Its 100% relevant, its been explained why dozens of times now. It demonstrates the current developers aren’t basing their policies or design decisions entirely around what devs who no longer work for the company thought 15 years ago. Sometimes their position is at complete odds with what blizzard used to think.
It’s what’s called a counterexample. The logical opposite of “never” isn’t “always”. It’s “sometimes”.
1 Like
This post is actually so on point, watch it get completely ignored.
1 Like
It has been explained multiple times. He refuses to even acknowledge the explanation he was given.
Humor me, then. One more time. What are the reasons dual spec is so incompatible with TBC as opposed to wrath, in light of everything he said there?
1 Like
It doesnt matter how compatible it is or isnt (edit: it isnt). Its simply not relevant. You cant even make a case for it getting in.
1 Like
There was a vast change in design goals. This was seen from class changes, content changes, exc.
A common reference of this is how wrath design goal became “bring the player not the class” moving away from the tbc designs of bringing the right class/spec for the job where spec choice mattered far more instead of role choice.
Basically every class got what they lacked in tbc to make them able to fill the role that before was much more spec and class specific. Interupts got put on classes that lacked then, hard CC got put on most classes that lacked them, aoe damage (and threat for tanks) got put on classes that were severely lacking it, buffs and debuffs were normalized and made class baseline and/or given to other classes, the list goes on, but the point being, this made specific specs matter less and focused more on what the role of the spec was.
Then there was the content changes. Heroics got MUCH easier, boss fights no longer felt like they required a specific spec for certain mechanics because of the class changes and instead you wanted a role for a mechanic and not a specific spec (tank, ranged dps, melee dps, healer, no longer caring about having a resto druid or priest because if movement fights because all healers had a way to heal on the move now, even if they were not as effective)
In tbc spec identity was a very big thing, in wotlk, it became role identity, spec no longer being nearly as important compared to the role the spec filled. This role identity is why “bring the player not the class” was used for wotlk.
Spec identity was far more of a thing in tbc than in wotlk. And tbc design goals and intentions wanted it that way. We have proof of this, and this is tbcc, not wotlkc or tbcc with a side of wotlk.
The change in design goals and intentions is very clear from tbc to wotlk and it shows that dual spec in wotlk (where it was role identity instead of spec identity) will be different in how it would effect tbc, where spec identity is the primary design goal intentions on class design.
2 Likes
Wrath was a systematic watering down of the game and most of its components. Specialization was no different - and we saw what happened at the end of the expansion - goodbye talent trees altogether.
4 Likes
No, it’s not relevant in the slightest and it’s a false equivalence of epic proportion.
The old devs ideas are 100% relevant when trying to recreate an experience that already occurred. You can add some changes, but as they’ve said they want to make sure the changes they make at the very least stay within the “guardrails” of the original design. It’s left slightly subjective, ball in Blizzard’s court, on how the old design direction is sometimes subjectively interpreted for newer changes meant to fit the modern players (such as drums changes etc).
Multi-boxing isn’t even in the same galaxy of issues. It’s a completely third party, player-actuated concept that has nothing to do with the design direction of any expansion, and has pretty much no specific relation to classic servers in particular, as it applies even to retail or any other game for that matter. There is no specific design tenet of TBC that says “part of having an authentic TBC experience is having/not-having multi-boxers”. Multi-boxers do not make or break a TBC experience. The issue of multi-boxers is a Blizzard one alone and is completely individual of the discussion of how to make TBC better/keep it in line with original goals.
They aren’t the same, not even remotely, and if you think they are, you too are proving you are incapable of honestly engaging on this topic.
bluetracker.gg/wow/topic/us-en/98646792-we-need-free-respecs-or-spec-swapping/
My ctrl + v is gettin’ a real workout.
The funny part is even in the blue posts you can sense how triggered she is about spec-swappers not taking the hint lol. They even drove the blues openly mad back then 
1 Like
Why do you endlessly go on and on about what the devs who no longer work for blizzard said 15 years ago about dual spec? Because you make the argument that these word constrain the devs who currently work for blizzard. I post about the change to multiboxing because it shows your hypocrisy and it’s proof that what the devs who no longer work for blizzard said does not constrain the devs who currently work for blizzard.
Multiboxing is an in game feature that was there from the first day to shadowlands that was vigorously defended by the original devs when players asked for it to be changed. It was more vigorously defended by the original devs 15 years ago then dual spec was. Then during classic it was changed. If your use of the words of the original devs on dual spec wasn’t a cynical ploy of a dishonest hypocrite you would consider multiboxing as more of an intended design then no dual spec and a larger deviation from that intended design than adding dual spec.
Because it’s completely relevant to why you aren’t getting dual spec.
Revisionist history lol.
You aren’t getting it.
Allowing or disallowing multi-boxing doesn’t change TBC, it simply affects those who multi-box.
Adding a silly, unnecessary WOTLK convenience feature in to TBC affects TBC.
I don’t really know how much more clearly the difference can be illustrated.
Meaningless words from a dev that no longer works for blizzard. They mean exactly as much to the modern devs as these words about multiboxing i.e. nothing.
Tom Chilton: [Laughs] Well, we actually are perfectly content to endorse multi-boxing to some reasonable degree. If a person wants to go out and buy a second account and power-level themselves, we’re okay with that.
This issue has been discussed to death on the World of Warcraft forums. If we change our stance regarding multi-boxing, you’ll know it.
Daxxarri – Community Manager 12/5/2012
For as long as you try to parrot that the issue of multi-boxing is in any way a mirror to dual spec, I will continue to slap you down and say:
There is far more evidence in the history from the devs supporting multiboxing than there is support for the early respeccing system. I’ve matched your posts from the devs against dual spec 4 to one with posts from the devs supporting multiboxing. Given the number of posts from the original devs supporting multiboxing compared to the number against change the original respec system it seems to be a more important issue to them.
1 Like
An ingame feature that used a 3rd party program…
Am I missing something here???
1 Like
You’re missing the fact that you’ve been thoroughly discredited on this forum. I’m confident that you’ve been identified as a liar and a hypocrite by the vast majority of readers.
1 Like
Hey Feywaif,