Would you agree it would be easier for the devs to balance 72 combinations, rather than entire spec roations against each other?
We should have masks for pre-patch. I vote you for Warchief!
1 Like
Youâre asking for them to balance 72 combinations by asking for it to be permanent.
They donât need to balance it if they free up the abilities.
WRONG! Youâre misrepresenting what I said, Mr. Network Engineer.
I said itâs possible to post the same dreck in multiple forums.
Huh? They ask for feedback and feedback is given. These general forums are extremely troll (see OP) and if you want to see the actual feedback head over to the Beta forums.
hrmm, I donât quite see how making it permanent would change the balance. As long as you canât change covenants on a per boss basis, you can achieve the same sentiment I believe.
Feedback would be things that add to the current design. Whether this works, this does not work. Thatâs feedback. Telling them exactly what you want done, isnât feedback. Itâs a list of demands.
Iâm just saying itâs easier to balance a smaller subset of spells than a larger one - which is what having to balance class/spec against each other entails.
1 Like
Again, go read the feedback here:
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/covenant-system-design-flaws-discussion/611673
Nobody is demanding anything. Just pointing out flaws and points of frustration with the system. The same way we pointed the flaws out with random legendary acquisition in Legion, artifact weapons in Legion forcing a single spec, Azerite armor being untradable, Azerite traits being unchangable, Essences not being account wide, and random corruption acquisition. Reminder - all of these systems were later changed.
5 Likes
One of these things is obtainable both ways. More flexible covenants in no way hinders your ability to stick firmly to one throughout the expansion.
The other makes the choice for both parties.
So how does other people changing their own covenant hinder you or even affect you in any way? When you are still capable of sticking individually to one yourself, even if others switch.
Everyone loves the legendary system in SL because it is deterministic. Blizzard can learn from past design issues and implement better ones, and they are showing that in Shadowlands. Iâm telling you, one small system in the game is not going to destroy your entire experience.
Also, did you see the latest beta build with nerfs to playersâ preferred class Covenant ability, and buffs to the no-so preferred ability? They are honing in on what people are saying and I think theyâll be able to achieve that desired âsweetspotâ of 2-3% variance between Covenants.
The nerfs were aimed at covenants that were the best choice for all specs, such as Paladin. There were no changes to class covenant abilities where one covenant was the best for one spec but the worst for another spec.
Um Kyrian and Venthyr were clear winners for DPS warriors, and they just had the damage nerf on Spear; and Necrolords class ability was redone and looks really good now.
Frankly, I donât play this game for âidentityâ, whatever that is. I play it for fun, for a sense of achievement and because I enjoy it, on the whole. And where did this identity come from? Where in the long and epic story of World of Warcaft is it embodied? Is it like choosing to create your character for the Horde or for the Alliance, identities that have existed for 15 years?
No, its some hocus that has been created to pop up for an expansion, and vanish into the dust of history when we move on to the next, most probably. And I agree - there is no reason to lock anything into any covenant or faction or whatever. Why can they not be purely RP choices with a set of RP rewards and activities, with souldbinds opening abilities that can eventually be interchanged by some relatively simple proces? Gifts earned by your efforts and the supply of Anima to each covenant, so that you support the whole endeavour and not simply one part of it?
I just dont get the narrow thinking on the part of Blizzardâs team in this case. Its forcing us into a straightjacket instead of offering true, intricate and entertaining story and gameplay.
2 Likes
Hahahahaha.
Guaranteed way to sink SLs.
lol, i feel your frustration OP. While permanent is not the direction i would go, i definitely think that choice needs to be meaningful and having min/maxers once again try to take over this game to defuse this is maddening. Even worse, most of the people who complain about this are doing so because people like Preach tell them too, and not because it has any meaningful change in their gameplay.
Keep resisting the loud ones Blizzard. Meaningful choice is important to have and needs to be defended.
2 Likes
Itâs a term I hear used a lot on this topic. Itâs like popcorn; mildly tasty but it doesnât stick with you.
Let me ask you this - what if, when you started playing WoW, you had to choose one race of your preferred faction - a meaningful choice that gave you special benefits but meant you could only ever play - for example - a Blood Elf. Would you feel that making that meaningful choice was worth being forced into playing only one race?
It may seem a silly comparison, but itâs basically relevant. In Sâlands they are saying that when you make X toon, you can only play it as part of one Covenant and only gain the benefits of that one Covenant - despite the fact that you are fighting for all of them, in effect. Gone is the common cause, the united front; you are a covenant member not a member of a grand union.
I donât see that as meaningful. I see it as diminishing.
5 Likes
Theyâre so confident in their ability to balance convenants that theyâve already told us theyâll probably just give up and not bother.
1 Like
You could choose a covenant and stick with it even if they were easily switchable.
1 Like
Covenants are almost the exact opposite of a meaningful choice. They have zero impact on the overall story and will have no lasting impact beyond Shadowlands. They are about as âmeaningfulâ as my choice of what to eat for breakfast.
6 Likes