Refuting the common arguments against Dual Spec

WoW Classic Cataclysm Classic Discussion
663

If its a convenience its not necessary. Does this thread really drive it home for you that these guys honestly have a laissez faire approach to dual specs? Like they couldn’t care either way? Why go after dissenters then? We could all just agree it doesn’t need to go in and accept it.

Ill say its an optional convenience and they’ll agree but once ‘optional convenience’ means it definitely doesnt need to be in there they jump the shark and start promoting it like its something we cant live without. When you point out the hypocrisy of that they defend by saying its no different then wanting potato chips or cookies and who the hell am I to tell someone not to eat chips and cookies.

When you point out its an opinion and a preference they very lovingly and very kindly do us all the honorable service of reminding you that your preference is inferior to their preference and you should just get out of the way already. Because you know, there are good opinions and bad opinions. The only way they can argue their position is to create a dichotomy where none exists and doesnt belong.

Pro dual spec = good. Pro non dual spec = bad. Cant make a case for that either but that does appear to be the underlying assumption theyre operating under. Seems like a lot of huckster BS and posturing for something you ultimately deem is optional (aka not important or necessary).

So who really cares what they say when they contradict themselves in every other post in the most hypocritical fashion possible.

664

Still a convenience to players if all that actually happened was that I had easier access to quest mobs, gathering nodes, etc.

So it was a convenience change, unattached to necessity or “solving a problem” or anything of the sort. It was a systemic matter that impacted everyone and the change did likewise, they didn’t have to change it at all. It just “felt” clunky so out of deference to that feeling, it was changed.

There was no need for same faction BGs. It only cut down on BG wait time, not doing BGs at all. Some people still queued (obviously, as Ally had pretty fast timers), but some just couldn’t be arsed to stay online for a queue to pop, requiring literally no skills or abilities, just patience.

That’s the very definition of a convenience change.

There wasn’t a problem, also see above changes that weren’t problems either.

Necessary.
Isn’t.
Required.
To.
Make.
A.
Change.

Because you goobers keep treating “need” as a requirement (it isn’t) and then assume status quo wins by default (it doesn’t) and argue in bad faith as to why dual spec can’t be added (like Zipzo’s insanity) or shouldn’t (everyone else).

The conversation should go like this:

Person A - I would like Dual Spec added, because Reasons A, B, and C.
Person B - I would not like Dual Spec added, because Reasons X, Y, and Z.
Person A - Reasons X, Y, and Z aren’t very good for Reasons 1, 2, 3.
Person B - Reasons A, B, and C aren’t…

Instead we get the following:

Person A - I like Dual Spec because…
Person B - SHUT UP AND GO TO RETAIL
Person C - OMG YOU DON’T NEED IT SO SHUT UP
Person D - FARM GOLD NOOB
Person E - BLIZZARD SAID YOU’LL NEVER GET IT
Person A - Uhhhh none of this…
Person B et al. - OMG look at this idiot trying to FORCE this on us!!!
Person A - Umm guys…?
Person B et al. - SOMETHING SOMETHING AMERICAN POLITICS SOMETHING SOMETHING EVIL

665

Dual Spec would allow classes uncomfortable Healing / Tanking to have those specs available. Allowing more diversity, and class changing to meet party needs when necessary.

I don’t like healing, but if I was Dual Spec I would be Shadow / Discipline or Holy so I could be ready for whatever our group needs.

666

That’s a pretty large wall of text…I might have missed it. How does dual spec make the game worse?

667

That’s a two way street. If necessity isnt required to make a change then there’s nothing required to halt said change either. Yet you still expect people to provide you with a good reason to not have dual specs when you dont feel compelled to do the same and even after you acknowledge they’re not necessary. Sounds alot like bias to me.

I also explained to Kuma why its a bad idea to operate this way - if necessity (solid reasoning) isnt grounds for change and you just have to want it and ask then where do we draw the line when people start asking for more convenience? Everyone cant get their way so maybe its a sound policy that no one should.

Need isnt required if youre just asking for the sake of asking with the reasonable expectation that your request might be denied. Doesn’t seem like that’s an outcome you’d be totally fine with however. If you really want them in there though then “need” (or just a really good reason thats backed up with something more than desire that everyone can see if not agree upon) is important because if nothing is forcing the issue than the issue doesn’t need to be forced.

If you understand its not necessary then you know its a request so then you should also know and accept that a request for more convenience doesnt have to be entertained or fulfilled.

With that, there’s no need to assume - the status quo does win by default because there is nothing actually recommending the status quo be altered - by your own admission. You are recommending it simply because you want it. That’s not good enough because by your own rules all I have to do to thwart you is to not want it. So you might not require necessity but you’re not getting anything without it either.

That doesnt have to be the case of course, Blizz could just cave and put it in but that would be in spite of necessity not because of it.

A: I would like extra convenience in my MMO where it didnt exist before.
B: I would like it if there was no more extra convenience.

I dont really know where to go from there - I floated the idea of differerent TBC servers with extra perks but no one seems to want that.

3 Likes
668

You have this entirely wrong. There’s no compulsion here. There’s no twisting of Blizzard’s arm. There are two things Blizzard wants to make a change they aren’t already considering:

  • Substantial (according to Blizzard) feedback/interest from the Classic community
  • Best interest (according to Blizzard) for said Classic community

That’s it. Then it becomes Blizzard’s baby to neglect (no response), drown (outright deny), or nurture (implement).

People, myself included, have given good reasons. What I expect is for people to not be idiots when trying to refute said reasons. That means not acting like the addition of Dual Spec is strictly off limits, when it isn’t. Or acting like asking for Dual Spec is akin to Sharia Law, when it hilariously isn’t. Or just being dumb and barking out the repeat “go back to retail” canard.

That’s just it, THERE IS NO LINE

People can and will ask for changes regularly from now until the day every server dies and Blizzard has long turned to dust. No request is off limits, no idea is verboten. Blizzard is the gatekeeper, not you guys.

It is. I will not quit the game if Dual Spec isn’t added. But the change doesn’t need to have some kind of deal breaking result.

I’ve said this more than once.

Blizzard themselves said that “need” isn’t needed. They’ve said it explicitly.

Interested feedback and best interest of the community, those are the requirements, no more, no less.

A request of any kind need not be entertained. It is Blizzard’s baby, not mine.

Not until TBCC ends, and that’s a long while from now.

Separate servers unnecessarily splits the player base further.

669

This is not very accurate and you know it.

1 Like
670

It is painfully accurate, because even though I and others actually put out our full reasoning, it just gets flatly ignored.

I’ve had to correct Corpseknife multiple times over the past few exchanges because he repeatedly attributes positions to me that I resoundingly don’t hold, have said so clearly, and have pointed out in post after post. Zipzo/Riger just ignore anyone that disagrees after crying foul. A few low post count people do meaningless drive-by’s of “Go back to retail!” Threads are made just to troll and strawman and attack people for daring to even suggest Dual Spec.

I’ve been called sociopathic, irrational, evil, incapable of empathy, emotionally abusive, etc, because of Dual Spec. If anything I’m being too kind.

671

Yeah, I’ve had names called at me too.

So maybe you haven’t been part of the name calling,

But as a whole, both sides are generally shouting in all caps

672

I get it, but I haven’t seen any serious discussion pushing against Dual Spec, just attacks, or accusations of entitlement, or accusations that we just hate some people somehow, or pushing for the “evils of Retail”, or other tripe.

If it was name calling and substantive arguments, I’d ignore the idiots and focus on the good arguments, but it is just name calling.

673

would you shutup about dual spec already? just because you are the most noisy minority does not make you the majority nor should you be looked to for insight on what’s best for the game. It’s like when Developers have a twitter account or make a reddit post, then let that feedback speak for everyone when they are just one tiny part of the userbase for their game that spends all their time posting online instead of playing.

1 Like
674

No.

Well since I don’t have dual spec, I only raid log which gives me more time to post about it on the forums.

1 Like
675

You have any proof that people that want (or are at least agnostic to) Dual Spec in TBCC are a “minority”?

2 Likes
676

This is a forced problem by a noisy and highly dedicated minority that want to get their way. Ask yourself why people who have nothing better to do but raid log can’t afford a 50g respec when their guilds have all the content on farm? These people don’t actually need or care about it, they just want to have the game changed for their whims so they can feel like they’re heard and left a mark. If you think that they’ll all just go home and stop posting about it once they get their way, you’re wrong, they will then start spamming a new ‘problem’ that’s suddenly a big deal. Probably something along the lines of “The dungeon finder isn’t good enough, and we NEED automatic dungeon matchmaking like retail, as well as instant teleports to dungeons, summoning stones do it anyway so just skip it”

They always demand more, and the only way to get rid of them is for developers to ignore them.

677
1 Like
678

Proof of the % of the population?

I can afford it, I choose not to do it. Once again the gold is not the issue.

So you want to improve a game by getting rid of players, therefore lowering the income for the developers. Good luck friend.

1 Like
679

A lot of nonsense in your opening sentence:

  • Problems either exist or they don’t, not sure how anyone is forcing anything, let alone what that could even look like
  • If posting on the forums is “noisy and highly dedicated” then the same applies to opponents as well
  • There’s that “minority” assertion again

I have thousands of gold, I could respec hundreds of times today and not run out. It isn’t cost. Many of us have said this explicitly, you goobers just don’t listen. I’d even pay a premium over and above the 1k gold cost of Dual Spec from WotLK. Gold isn’t the issue, it is a strawman to make it the issue.

I care about the game, which is why I want Dual Spec added, as it will be more beneficial to the modern Classic audience than not.

…people will always make suggestions, this isn’t a new phenomena. Some of those suggestions will be poorly received and die within the thread that suggests them. Others will spark great interest and live on for days, weeks, months, etc. That suggestions exist doesn’t make any particular problem to address a bad thing. This is just “get off my lawn, yall too noisy” curmudgeon talk.

So you’re against changes for… the sake of just being against changes? Neat. Useless. But neat.

PS - You proved nothing other than that you’re a grumpy old coot that doesn’t like change for no other reason than the kiddos are too loud about changes. :rofl:

680

Are you one of the same people that looks at sales figures for a game to judge how successful and good it is, but ignore that 80-90% of the players who bought that successful game don’t play it more than a couple of hours before moving on to another? Activision has more than enough money from monthly subs and all the whales who bought into the boost and mount scheme to sustain these servers for a long time. If all the players who absolutely needed dual spec just to play the game were to leave today (And I mean REALLY leave, not just make a whiney post saying they’re leaving as a threat then come back 3 weeks later) it would barely dent the population, as most of them again, spend most of their time online whining than actually playing.

1 Like
681

Do you have proof of this number or are you just making it up to make your point seem more valid?

1 Like
682

Actually there are changes I want, but they are actually beneficial to the game. The main change I rally for is doing away with EXP leeching in dungeons and killing dungeon boosts outright. If the level difference between a group of players is too high, the EXP penalty should be severe enough that grouping with a 70 mage will net 1EXP per mob instead of the 200 they’re getting now. Why do I want this change? because it will slow down player progression which forces more people to form natural dungeon groups or quest together in zones which in turn populates the world.

What will adding dual spec do? you’ll have every healer and tank with an offspec ready to swap for a dungeon, but they still won’t want to play those roles if they aren’t already playing them now.

Ah yes, “everyone who disagrees with me is old and dumb and I am young and smart”