Why should I have to play four characters? The only thing that serves to push up is MAUs.
As someone that plays this game I want both to matter.
I don’t think we should be forced to choose one at the detriment of the other.
RP and game play are both equally important in keeping this game alive . Forcing it to go one way or the other is going to have the highest negative affect then anything else in the game including pathfinder and the high elf debate.
1 Like
coughs up drink
Some people find this beneficial. If you hate it that much - then stop paying your sub fee and play another game like FFXIV that lets you switch classes freely.
It’s not going to matter if they reduce covenants to a talent tree you can swap at any rest area.
At that point they might as well just implement the class swapping that FFXIV has.
Method/Limit players have already started doing this - and so have many people that I play with.
My plan is to have 4 DH’s, 4 Warlocks, and at least 2 Warriors for Shadowlands.
1 Like
Not everyone is Method/Limit. Nor should anyone have to be if they just want to perform well.
1 Like
That sounds painful lols.
I’m sticking with my single mage, for all it’s worth. And I have no fear about seeing content no matter which covenant I pick.
You guys speak as if one covenant will do well in M+, and the other will just be non-functional. That won’t be the case.
People don’t want to have to do that they want to play the toon/s they enjoy playing .
And yet here we are. With a punitive system that has lots of people supporting it specifically because it forces others to play a particular way.
If it’s not valid, then how and why is one of the biggest MMORPG development teams making the central system to their new expansion exactly this?
You say this like they didn’t make azerite…
Except I’ve only really stated that one will work well in PvE while the other will work well in PvP.
This covenant system seems far more punitive than the Azerite system.
If one covenant dealt X% of DPS in PvE, and that same covenant did 0% DPS and had no effect in PvP, you might have a point. You can pick the “PvE” covenant and still use it against people in PvP, and vice versa.
It is, their design decisions have gotten even worse. It’s like they are actively trying to kill the game IMO.
P.S: I’m muting this thread. People are treating it more like a religion than actual gameplay or wallowing in schadenfreude.
It is, but it’s the most simple way to get around how the system punishes players for wanting to play the game how they enjoy across various forms.
If this was vanilla with dungeons that don’t have affixes and raids that had minimal dps/healing checks and boring mechanics - it wouldn’t matter. But this game has evolved far beyond those days.
1 Like
Ya huh. Hunter Covenants though, not really. The other Covenants can have better DPS output, but the Kyrian Covenant hands down will make it the best for Arena players.
Just as a reminder, the Kyrian Covenant allows the Hunter to put down an Arrow that anything within its area of effect will allow the Hunter to ignore LoS and grants a 30% increase on Crit Chance. That cannot be ignored for PvP.
The point of the choice is to have it be meaningful. If you can swap them at any time then it isn’t a meaningful choice.
People that say they need to be able to switch covenants so they can be optimal for any given situation on the fly. These are the same type of people that believe they have to play skyrim as stealth archer because it is the most optimal build in the game.
It’s their game to kill I suppose. They own it, they can make whatever decisions they want with it.
Your choice is to continue to pay them, or not.
Your checkbook will speak much louder than any words you post on the forums.