Its been “broken” because of a single, tiny, minor talent choice. It seems like the problem is that talent choice.
Why is this tiny, minor talent choice becoming the reasoning behind an entire specs rework?
Seems to me the problem is Lone Wolf. Not Pets.
they dont get shafted. they get improved. an extremely annoying part of their class is getting revamped… it’s like if Ppal and BDK didn’t have to play around consecration / DnD anymore, it would be great.
Make BL and Lone Wolf baseline so people don’t have to summon their pet if they don’t want to.
How much you wanna bet it won’t be long before they remove that as well, or how about single minded fury? I’m sure more and more will be simplified in the game. everything will be just a simplified little simple game.
They are fixing it. You just reject the fix.
“I sure do find the pets in my pet class annoying.”
You’ll adapt or you won’t, improving something isn’t a bad thing.
If people don’t want a pet they should go play a warrior or a class that don’t have pets. Why should hunters get shafted?
They did remove it, but players asked back, so Blizzard obligued. But it’s easier to keep them than pet/petless because gameplay doesn’t change that much, it’s just number crunching, and Blizzard is fine with an option being slightly undertuned.
The problem with the pet is that it hinders the spec toolkit.
Objectively yes it improves a lot of pain points because it’s a literal complete rework. But if they iterated on lone wolf and actually tried to make it work and balance it correctly between soloing and pets, none of us would even be arguing right now
Because the pet doesn’t do anything… its a hp wall that taunts to the people passionately defending it.
Let the spec grow and become something more then it is. Trying to defend MM pets baffles me to no end. It doesn’t do anything, its never done anything. I don’t want to see a new interesting spec be gutted to keep the moldy corpse of what it is shambling along another day.
Yeah, and if you didn’t like using your little HP wall, you could use lone wolf too bad they’re removing the option from everybody
Defending removal of player choices baffles me.
100%. I’ll never ever understand people ardently defending taking away more options from the players. It’s only a matter of time before even more is removed.
They aren’t fixing Lone Wolf. They’re 100% removing it, and completely redoing the entire spec because of it.
Lone wolf is a minor talent choice. It isn’t even a major one. Why is this one little tiny insignificant minor talent choice so powerful? So much so that the need to rework the entire spec to make the lone wolf work is baffling. To make the minor talent choice work, an entire spec is redone.
WHAT CHOICE?
To have a passive non interactive pet that does less then white attacks?!?
I could get pvpers arguing this if pvpers didn’t hate using pets to get value out of sacrificial roar. Instead its people screaming that they are gonna be rocked by world elites…
And that’s why I don’t bother explaining stuff in detail. I present all the conflicts and design problems, and they are just ignored in favor of the usual arguments that boil down to “but I don’t want it”.
And that’s why this change will happen anyway, because instead of bringing suggestions based on how to circunvent the problems, they just order “I don’t care, solve it yourselves”.
No, we have said multiple times blizzard could fix it in a way that gives both sides what they want, but they’re not doing that. They’re giving you what you want, which is why you’re acting like we’re a bunch of idiots. But good for you I’m glad that you’re happy.
We know… you admitted multiple times you have zero idea how class design works I don’t know why you insist on reminding us. Its like screaming every 30s in a library that you can’t read then trying to give book reviews to the crowd…
Saying that I have zero idea how class design works isn’t the argument or the win you think it is. I honestly don’t even know what you’re talking about half the time you come in here and say the most random things