Of course they didn’t. Gumby can’t stretch as far as these people are trying. The dev on the right essentially said go play BfA if you want that kind of class design. That’s not what Classic is about. Ion said the same.
1 Like
It sounds to me as if your “solution” is a laundry list of major changes, none of which are even remotely “in the spirit of vanilla” or “vanilla like”.
Those changes would seem to be rules out by the statements from Blizzard. Maybe you can explain how “we don’t have any plans to make any changes to any of the balance in 1.12” leads to those major changes you “suggest”.
1 Like
is it really a bug if the talent literally says on crit?
i get the point you are making. and i agree that this would be a tweak.
i can’t honestly agree with the rest of your statement. adding gear or turning tier gear into tokens to turn in for an appropriate spec is all of a sudden a tweak?
adding mana regen to a class is a tweak?
you’re talking about major changes there.
i can agree with your ideas about ret paladins. like the vengeance talent change. but the rest of that? way outside of the realm of tweaks.
If there are more changes to the game… what would be the point of even calling it classic wow. It would just be new wow…
…
…
If you want changes, you dont want to play classic wow. You want to just play a new WoW. Not BFA… and not classic. You just want a new wow.
GO AWAY BFA BABIES. GO ASK FOR CHANGES IN YOUR BFA PLACES.
Thanks for your time again.
Love,
Slickz.
1 Like
There have been those that have tried to claim that it is a “bug” if the strength that a given CLASS brings to a given aspect of the game is not how a player WILLFULLY CHOOSES to play that CLASS.
i would say its not a well designed talent. not a bug. its why later on it was revamped. but those were all over the place in vanilla and bc. it wasn’t until around wrath that stuff got better.
When the strength of the class doesn’t even match their own class description, the designer of the class openly talks about how they where a design failure, and when that aspect of the game is nearly the only thing in the game that’s given any consideration whatsoever to balance concerns… let alone when that aspect of the game is the near exclusive source of post 60 power gains, and when specs take entirely different sets of gear and are intentionally and purposefully difficult and expensive to change between…
You “conveniently” left those details out of your attempt to form a point…
No.
The point is that EVERY CLASS was desired in raids. EVERY CLASS brought a strength to the raid environment. It may not have been the strength that Johnny wanted it to be, but that is a JOHNNY problem, NOT a CLASS problem.
It is not a “bug” that the strength a given CLASS brought to a given aspect of the game was not the strength that Johnny wanted it to be.
The fact remains that Blizzard has specifically stated that they “don’t have any plans to make any changes to any of the balance in 1.12”.
That has not stopped these “requests” for any number of major non vanilla changes to “class balance”, though.
1 Like
“Blizzard said…” isn’t even argument to begin with. You keep bringing that up thinking it somehow invalidates what other people are saying.
You’re like a preacher. “The Bible says…” isn’t an argument.
Stop demanding that conversations be shut down. You’re just as annoying as that mindless troll.
1 Like
Are you expecting to Blizzard to suddenly abandon the entire precept of Classic and create a level 60 capped version of retail in a vanilla setting?
1 Like
Not at all. But, trying to refute any suggestion with “Blizzard said…” is just annoying.
Look, there’s tons of things that I hear from #nochangers that I agree with to a certain degree.
But, there’s a difference between defending the spirit of Classic and demanding that all suggestions be refuted on principle.
The problem I have with #nochangers is that they don’t bother to explain what makes it okay to have T3 optimized sets while at the same time having the borderline neanderthal loot that is T1.
Show me how both T1 and T3 are both in the spirit of Classic. I don’t think you will. I think that people will espouse that T1/T2 sets (even some T3 sets) make almost no sense in any way shape or form.
There’s nothing wrong with seeing the blatant inconsistency of Classic. Some people ask for those inconsistencies to be resolved in a productive manner. I think that’s well within Bilzzard’s ability to deal with.
That doesn’t prevent Classic from being Classic. It resolves an inconsistency within Classic. That’s not a bad thing.
1 Like
The answer is very simple.
T1 and T2 were part of vanilla. They may have been one of those warts, but that makes them no less a part of vanilla.
That is the consistency.
It’s not about how you or I think they should have been designed. It’s about how they WERE designed.
Classic is about a return to the roots of WoW, warts and all.
1 Like
How are all T1, T2, and T3 within the spirit of Classic? The answer is that they aren’t.
Classic was wildly inconsistent with itself.
The answer is that Blizzard should take a hint and fix their own inconsistencies instead of pretending that they don’t exist.
I get it. T1, T2 and T3 were not designed the way you would have wanted them to be designed and they did not work the way you want them to.
That does not negate the consistency that all of them WERE part of vanilla.
It is one thing for Johnny to note that things in vanilla may have seemed inconsistent or did not function in the manner he would have liked, but still accept those warts with Classic’s return to the roots of WoW, warts and all.
It is another thing entirely for Johnny to ask Blizzard for a “remake” of classic to suit him and his desires.
1 Like
False, my point is that T1, T2 and T3 are vastly different from one another. You can try to use fallacy, move goal posts, misrepresent my point, and other dirty tricks. But, it won’t work.
Classic was wildly inconsistent with itself. It’s a good idea for Blizzard to address those inconsistencies in a productive manner.
Even in retail, different levels of tier sets are vastly different from each other. Even in retail, tier sets have unwanted stats and/or underwhelming set bonuses.
You can ask Blizzard for a “remake” of classic to suit you, but I will be here asking Blizzard to make classic as vanilla as orcishly possible, warts and all.
1 Like
That’s a false comparison. The difference between T1 and T3 is overwhelming compared to all other Tier sets released within a single iteration of the game.
All you do is use fallacies to try to defend your point here.
The issue is the spirit of Classic. T1-T3 shows an obvious inconsistency. There’s nothing wrong with Blizzard addressing that inconsistency.
2 Likes
I get it. You want Blizzard to remake Classic to suit you.
I want Classic to be as vanilla as orcishly possible, warts and all.
3 Likes
Like I said, you’re just like that other troll.
There’s no point arguing with someone who refuses to even address your argument.
1 Like
Kind of like trying to have a discussion with someone who refuses to see the consistency that T1, T2 and T3 were all part of vanilla?
Kind of like trying to have a discussion with someone who refuses to see that trying to “fix” the “warts” that he sees as inconsistencies would take classic right out of the realm of “as vanilla as orcishly possible” and into the realm of a “remake”?
1 Like