Ion: "We hear you!" Class Design Being Fixed in 9.0?


(Howardmoon) #92

I don’t have ADD or ADHD but dayum…stop moving around. Get Jeff Kaplan in there.


#93

many truths to this lol


(Ruddypiper) #94

Actions speak louder than words. Ion is really good with words though, being a lawyer and all.

I don’t get this at all.

Fantasy is full of different types of character using different methods to achieve the same ends.

“Bring the player, not the class” is loads better than A, B, C, D, E meta’s because F-Z plus are all too “niche” in their niche’s to be valuable. So what if a Warrior and a DK have the same amount of mobility, utility, and dps if they are arriving there with different rotations and spell effects?

I mean, sure it’s awesome if you FOTM switch or play one of the perennial top dog specs but not if your spec gets passed over because FOTM brings more damage and utility easier. It’s not awesome if you play a spec that rarely if every gets any love or one that gets the NERF ICBM every time it starts to do well.


(Nadirah) #95

Im not a fan of damage traps as BM.

I just think having my tranq on my pet is annoying as Hate.


(Ruddypiper) #96

They’ve also said, for like 5+ years that they are working on improving communication…


#97

I’m enjoying the discussion on this information, keep is going (and within limits please). :slight_smile:

Also just linking to the bookmark on class design:


#98

To give the devil their due this sort of exchange is why class balance and talent design is difficult. No matter what you do, you’ll never please everyone because everyone wants something different.

(not calling you guys out or anything fyi)


(Nadirah) #99

Hi bornakk. Glad to see you around.

I just really hope they fix something and they do it right.


#100

If we could get rid of the GCD, especially for tank’s healing abilities, that would be a great start. They could flip that switch today if they cared so much.


(Zaia) #101

Oh joy. Ive been looking forward to another complete overhaul of demonology…


(Silvermage) #102

Bornakk, pass along I’d like to see a thread per class opened by Blizzard to garner what can be done to make each class fun again where we the players can place our thoughts and hopefully get some back and forth going.

Want to see that NOW not when 9.0 “friends and family alpha” hits as that has been demonstrated to be too late in the process for the dev team to change.


Class Feedback Topics for 9.0?
#103

Now if they can just get rid of all the welfare gear that falls from the sky we’ll be in good shape.


(Zoumz) #104

Yea I personnaly would like to have most GCD changes be reversed. The only thing for me that needed to change was warrior dps cds, they could have fixed those and be done with it. I still can’t believe deathgrip is on the GCD.


(Lorsaire) #105

I am glad to hear they realized they over pruned. But i am not happy to hear they think they went too far with spec differences.

Unholy DKs need tuning. But the general uniniqueness of the play against Frost or Blood is great. The problem is part of what got pruned away, with out frenzied speed boost from Unholy Presence having been removed to make us more homogenized with Frosts slow plodding spec fantasy. We need more Unholy spec fantasy there again, not less. And we definitely need PvE AMZ back. That was a critical piece of our fantasy they gutted for no good reason to a PvP talent.

So i see good and bad here. Partially glad to hear them admit mistakes were made with over pruning. Not trusting them on what they will think was over pruned.


#106

its called class forums…


(Zoumz) #107

He basicly said that he thinks essence system is a good enough deal if you’re pushing content and that gear progression shouldn’t be relevant anymore.


#108

Cheers for that!


#109

Really? Guess I’ll have to watch the video. If that’s the new direction then I’m out.


(Zoumz) #110

Well I’m darkening it a bit, but it’s that basicly catchup gear is doing nothing wrong. Also didn’t talk about titanforging going away :woman_shrugging:


(Nozfuratu) #111

I’ll believe it when I see it. They’ve said this kind of thing before.