#DualSpec No not giving up

So what you’re saying to be perfectly clear and concise:


Did I sum that up correctly?

1 Like

Bent what rules? They said from the start that changes were on the table and they’ve made changes, almost like they’re doing exactly what they said.

with all the changes that have been made, and the changes that are still on the table - #nochanges is the ultimate #copium

The fact that the word entitlement is used while demanding #nochanges is the pinnacle of irony, demanding the experience that they want, but telling us that asking for QoL improvements is us being entitled. It’s mind boggling.

I’ve never once stated support for full wotlk dual spec, in fact my only reason for contributing as I have is to balance the scales of utter malarkey and horrible reasoning on the #nochanges side.

I don’t even disagree that more changes are bad, and I personally don’t care if there are no more changes. I just don’t like people flat out denying facts and lying to try and win an argument when you can literally google ‘Patrick Dawson interview’ and see the actual TBCC lead developer talk about their stance on changes.

Anyway I’ll check back tomorrow to see what other copium these fanatics come up with as to why they think that all of the changes that were made were good, and along the original designers intent back in 2007, like HvH BGs, alliance getting seal of blood, and any other various changes that have been mentioned ad nauseum.

If blizzard had added dual spec and we were asking for the lfd these people would have some rationalization why dual spec was actually the design goal intention of the original devs and had to happen but the lfd isn’t

We aren’t no changes.

We’re “less changes, not more”.

No changes, by sheer technicality, can’t exist because changes were already made.

1 Like

aw crap guys, looks like we unfortunately have another departure from #nochanges.

What other changes might they make due to community requests??? No… that’s impossible. The developers are not going to continue to develop TBCC alongside the community. No.

Too bad I’ve already stated like 5 million times, even in my just previous post, that we aren’t nochanges and haven’t been.

They still won’t add dual spec.

After this easing of the PvP barrier for entry, the argument needing dual spec to increase PvP engagement goes completely out the window lol and you have even less of a leg to stand on.

1 Like

Complete and total copium, you telling me that corpseknife and redheadchild aren’t #nochanges? You’re completely delusional.

Yes, making more people interested in PvP by lowering the barrier to entry means they will respec less.

You’re totally out of your mind.

1 Like

I don’t understand why you guys are so against dual spec, what are some cons?

It reduces the impact of spec choice, which should remain important in TBC.

Personally I don’t see why the “impact of spec choice” is so important, but I guess that’s for another argument.
So in order to remain the “impact of spec choice”, people have to choose between pvp and pve? For some classes their pvp and pve specs are completely different, why do those classes have to respec every week if they want to experience both pvp and pve content of the game?

It’s inherent to TBC design, as spoken by the developers themselves, so adding dual spec is not in the spirit of TBC.

LOL, they already introduced so many changes, are those changes in the so called spirit of TBC?
I never understand you people asking for no changes. Without any changes, classic will just repeat retail’s path and die once again. Blizzard made many mistakes in retail, now with classic, isn’t their best chance to correct those mistakes and make some improvements to save this game?

None of them are directly contradictory to TBC, as far as I can reason, Blizzard has simply been so clear about their rejection of dual spec that it’s much easier to know for sure in this specific case.

When did blizz introduce mercenary mode in retail? WoD? A lot of people simply choose Alliance because of the shorter bg queue. Mercenary mode totally changed that, how is that not directly contradictory to TBC?

There’s being contradictory to how TBC was in a #nochanges sense, and then there’s being contradictory to TBC in terms of it’s intended experience that was explicitly meant to be part of experience intentionally from a design perspective.

The lack of dual spec is a feature. That was explicitly the point. It was purposeful.

Giving horde shorter queues because in 2021 the horde decided to overbalance the alliance 3:1, which wasn’t the case in real TBC, imo does not break any historically explained or rationalized key tenets of the TBC intended experience. It was a fix to a real problem that was causing an issue that was actually important to solve.

The issue of gold for respecs is not an issue that needs solving. It’s a convenience element. It’s easy to respec if you just do your dailies.

Why do some classes need to do dailies to earn gold for respec while other classes don’t?
Is the lv58 boost not a convenience element? Can’t those people just spend some time to level like we did back in original TBC?

1 Like

I consider the lvl 58 boost to be one of the worst decisions Blizzard has ever made. If you’re trying to make an argument for dual spec’s necessity, the boost being a thing isn’t really a great way to prop up the potential benefits of dual spec.

I am just saying it is ridiculous to think Blizzard actually cares about the so called TBC spirit.

It’s not. They’ve cited authenticity as a reason for not changing/fixing other jank as recently as in the last month over on the CC forums.