Only reason I’d even consider Kyrian is because of Vesper Totem. They are the most boring covenant, and their little servant power is super lame.
1 Like
My point is that having the power and the mog sroerated hurts no one. If people want to pick based on mog they can. If they don’t care then they don’t have to. Win win.
3 Likes
Of course I don’t.
I’m sorry but you probably will have to choose. What’s most important to you, player power or aesthetics?
That was made on purpose so people choose differently and we have a large variety of classes/covenants combination. How you choose is what will make your character unique.
I’m not, and I’m only stating the obvious.
A covenant is about player abilities, mogs, the zone itself, lore, mounts…
Basically, a bunch of things that you have to weigh down what’s most important for you when choosing.
It would take away the weight of choosing a covenant. The whole point is for it to be a tough choice.
See I’m hoping that we won’t. Which is why I’m voicing my opinion as much as possible and on as many platforms as possible in order to make myself heard. Again, it’s not about wanting everything with no consequences, it’s about wanting the consequences to fit the content.
2 Likes
Poll wasn’t open long enough. No way that it would be accurate in such a short window.
It can still be a tough choice without having powers attached. It’s too many different areas of game that are effected by 1 decision.
It’s like asking what food you prefer pizza ice-cream or pancakes. They don’t fall into the same category so you wouldn’t like to choose and then not eat the others for 2 years.
And your choice if food also determines the shoes you will wear for the next year and which friends you can hang out with.what if I want to see my mate Craig and go out for some beers in town wearing my nice shoes? Too bad I chose pizza so I only get to wear my runners and see my mate will.
2 Likes
But if you reduce the number of things in the “package”, the result is homogenization.
For example, druids interested in lore/aesthetics are probably choosing Ardenweald. And let’s say the coolest ability for druids is from the Kyrians.
If you let those things apart pretty much all druids will be joining Ardenweald and using the kyrian ability. Instead of having many Ardenweald druids and many Kyrian druids.
Personally if every Druid chose Ardenweald druid because it fit the thematic of their class the best, that would be a 100% better than every Druid picking Venthyr simply because their ability is the best.
Covenants should be a choice based purely on story and aesthetics. Introducing character power in the form of both the general and class-based abilities was always going to be a terrible idea.
2 Likes
Tough to say to be honest, so I was thinking if I run a sim and Venthyr comes out on top I’ll do that, however then I realized if Night Fae comes out top I’ll choose that. After more contemplation on the aesthetics I realized if either necrolord or kyrian sim the highest I’ll choose that. Man so many options and 99% of the player base is gonna end up choosing whats best sim/utility wise but ya know lets give the 1% of players who only look at aesthetics this system for the sake of not having balance 
I think posting something like this alone and not giving feedback isn’t really helpful to the dev’s (if they even read this lol) so I am also gonna add what I believe would be a good solution along with my above complaint.
If they literally remove 100% of the player power from covenants and only leave in the cosmetics then add some kind of system like another row of 4 talents or even a glyph system and allow players to choose the best ability and passives and not lose out on the cosmetics if the one that we find the best looking ends up not being the best for whatever content we’re doing.
Apparently you’re not louder than those of us who enjoy the punishing nature of the system and want it to stay as-is.
There are consequences, on a content by content basis.
When I pick one ability for an arena match or M+, the consequence is that I can’t use the other 3.
Consequences still exist in a system where you can freely swap.
Additionally - the choices we would be making become VERY meaningful because they will impact gameplay based on my groups class composition, the other groups composition (in PvP), the affixes (M+), etc. This is where player agency would come into play and would matter A LOT.
Restricting covenants removes all of that potential for meaningful choices and player agency.
3 Likes
That is gross!!!
At least the art team is A+.
How do you know? Nothing is set in stone yet, friend. Better keep posting!
Because everyone picking Venthyr because of a broken ability is sooooo much better.
What I find so frustrating about this system and it’s defenders is the same problem I have with anti-flyers. Removing someone’s choice in game because you personally don’t like something is a really crumby way to think.
Also “meaningful choice” is another nothing burger that keeps getting tossed around. It’s not meaningful to lock me into a decision that hinders my gameplay. This is the equivalent of making us locked into talents/azerite for the entirety of BFA. That’s not fun. I enjoy raids/M+ and sometimes PvP. Considering my enjoyment of the content I am gonna have to chose a covenant that has a useful ability for the majority of the content I enjoy and be meh for the rest. That’s not meaningful it’s limiting which again… Not. Fun.
If you wanna lock yourself to one covenant then be my guest. Go all in on one but removing that choice for the rest of us is a bad idea.
Also Blizz your messaging makes no sense “we don’t want you flying cause you skip over content” locks 3/4th of the content behind a faction “choice” …
3 Likes
Things have just been going downhill like this since talent tree specializations. “Restrictive choices” are fake choices.
1 Like
Swappable covenants:
Casual players can choose the looks they like and RP the !@#$ of their covenant of choice. They will never be required to change them. Hardcore players, on the other hand, can engage in all three forms of endgame (raids, M+ and/or PvP) without being handicapped.
Non-swappable (or very hard to swap) covenants:
Casual players enjoy all the aforementioned advantages, while hardcore players get shafted without any discernible advantage, other than muh meaningful choice.
2 Likes
A much-needed, drastic, and more flexible change would also let YOU choose a faction to RP with and one to play with. And NOT seeing a change means you may very well have to punish yourself when you participate in mechanic related play because of what choice made RP sense for your main.
RP players are being asked to choose BETWEEN RP and gameplay and it’s no good, at all.
Blizzard, we NEED flexibility, for this and many other reasons already noted in this thread.
1 Like
RP players are actually punished into choosing what to RP OR PLAY. Many of us who RP ALSO PLAY and if I cant take my covenant choice into BGs or Arenas on any of my toons but especially my main- that crushes me as a player who casually enjoys several aspects of the game.
I’m appalled by this system and the more we hear the worse it gets. Alpha testing needs to start including batches of the majority of players so they arent shocked when they get to beta and horrified when they go live by our reactions.
Blizzard DO SOMETHING to this system NOW before it’s too late. (And if it’s “too late” in alpha, then YOU are the problem, not the customer playerbase)
1 Like