Historically the meta ends up more diverse the easier it is to do alts
https://screamintothevoid.com/
No such thing, more alts means easier time to climb rating as more participants are part of the pool (even if not quite unique participants), and we end up with people willing to experiment with different spec combos to find comps people wouldn’t have normally tried before
Stop spamming my thread man.
Highlight the text, click the copy quote option and make it all into one post. It’s not hard.
You have like 7000 post you should know this by now.
2 Likes
Reworks are doo doo, we need redesigns of classes. BM barely feels any different besides damage. I don’t want double pet’s or dire beasts 
Could you elaborate for the mentally challenged (me)?
1 Like
BM does big damn but doesn’t feel any different to play after the rework. I didn’t read the patch notes thurougly so I assumed rework was gonna change how the class played. Stick with my SV for the time being.
Is it still one button smashing?
Oh so it wasn’t a true rework, just more of a reshuffling then, is that right?
I always felt thematically beastmaster pets should just be where all the utility is backing up the hunter and not the source of damage.
But I also feel surv should be a pure melee without any pet what so ever, so probably a good idea I’m not a class designer for hunter.
Yea, but SV got 1 pet for the button smashing so I like it. Also 2h xmogs with illusions
If 3 or 4 specs are 80% of the ladder above 2400 then when they get nerfed they instantly go down i think its pretty obvious that representation at the higher end of the ladder does somewhat correlate to what is strong. Also listening to glads and skillcap guides who employee full time tournament players i think its pretty naive to say you know better and nothing is ever OP. Im kinda just assuming you are trolling now if you are actually telling me that feral\spriest\ele\BM hunter are not the stronger specs right now based on all the evidence we have.
Just wait until the next Arena cup, usually they are playing the strongest things due being in a game where the outcome is winning money.
The ease of success compared to ease of entry is different than something’s maximum potential.
For example monk is underrepresented, but played well is an absolute beast in damage, control, and defense.
With multiple short cds and their ability to kite between goes makes them a top contender, but the problem is the gap between floor and ceiling is high so it requires more potential effort than other specs to play it.
On top of traditionally the comps monk would play are just alternate versions of warrior/rogue comps.
Like I said representation is a poor metric for using as evidence of something’s strength.
This. Disappointed in the spriest reworks, Archon got zero new spells, lol how TF does that happen in a hero tree.
Balance druids ain’t that interesting either, imo
1 Like
I agree which is why i said if you use representation statistics along with skill cap tier lists\reviews\gladiator players reviews you get a good idea on whats good. I know that you cant just use representation i never said just representation. But when 70% of the bracket is made up of 6 or 7 specs when we have 40 in the game along with pro player reviews of specs its evident what is op. IE Spriest last patch or feral\hpal\frost mage\ele\BM.
I mean it isn’t holy priest level unplayable. As soon as the top specs get address somewhat it should get better.
That’s as long as they don’t introduce 10 different bugs in the time being.
Ferals def. needs a hit to bleeds. Bm need a hit as well for how easy it gets off its damage.
Alt friendly it’s a good thing. Especially with how changes can drastically change classes/specs now a days.
Plus it keeps players interested since if you get bored you can try something else out w.o much of an issue. You need that for longevity.
1 Like
Game is a meta slow damp fest and also feels dead. Blizzard magic at work yet again.
Are generally biased representations and bad calls to begin with.
Historically a lot of those guys will upplay their counters while subsequently also down playing their own preferred classes.
But even tier lists opinions are wildly different due to differing justifications of why said rank was assigned.
It’s evident what is perceived, not what it empirically is.
Something being hard to play doesn’t make something not OP.
1 Like