Quoting so the juvenile response isn’t lost in case it’s removed.
Classes should not depend on a tier set to perform well or be fun to play. In case you haven’t noticed, tier sets are temporary. We have spent too many times in the last expansions “fixing” classes with borrowed power only for those issues to all come back once the borrowed power is obsolete.
Tier sets dont make it fun all the time and im not saying it should be to perform well. Survival tier currently adds no play to it, its literally just dmg gains all around that should in my opinion be base line buffs, which we got exactly that today according to wowhead. But thats fine because survival is already super fun to play, it just enhances us. Do i wish it was different? sure, but do i also wish that there was a system as the expansions go on from s1 → s4 where the tier sets start out simple like this and get super fun and cool and complex by s4 like wildfire bombs not have a achance to throw a nuclear bomb that deals 5x the amount of dmg ur party does to it over 10 seconds or something? Of course. Tier sets being temporary are fine, im all for base classes being good because then theres something to fall back on when tier sets are taken away, but lets have some fun with it and go crazy with these tiers, if its not good for 6 months of the year or whatever a seasons length is guess what? theres 12 other classes and 3 more seasons of change you can enjoy.
The current Survival tier situation is actually a perfect example of why making tier sets gamechangers is bad because Survival’s gameplay and performance depend on the current one and the spec gets hit hard by moving to the new one.
yeah the current sv tier set makes it a little ridiculous because it already has 2 (more or less mandatory) talents that already increase mongoose bite’s damage (which in itself increases its own damage) and it’s why you will probably see sv fall off hard next raid tier. same kind of issue sv had in s4 except its tierset made it ridiculous in both st and aoe. unfortunately it seems as though you cannot have it both ways
the next tier set looks like something that would have been an excellent talent choice in the tree rather than the bland mess of talents we got. but the issue again is having to wait 6 weeks before i get to go from having bad aoe to decent aoe
AOE is completely fine right now without tier, Butchery is a huge amount of our aoe for sure but its still gonna be good with 15% less dmg. Kill shot, explosive shot, and all the different bomb types + fury of the eagle are extremely good dmg currently. Itll only get better in my opinion with our 9.5% overall dmg buff and the new wildfire dmg buffs from s2 tier, is it what i want? no, but it will be fine for now. as i said tho i would like the slight change to the s2 tier for it to really be considered balanced.
making them gamechangers is fine but only if they keep it balanced, its blizzs biggest issue rn is that they nerf the top, and buff everyone else so suddenly the middle guys are now the top guys by a margin comparable to before. They just dont seem to play the game anymore or even consider the balancing, like why are mages using 372 m0 trinkets as bis?
A “gamechanger” with a ‘choice’ only between “have” and “don’t have” is inherently impossible to balance.
Its net result can only be “acquire asap or be left behind,” which then constrains the content the player can do, makes it harder to even reach the hurdle because the player’s spec will have to ultimately be roughly balanced around having the massive power boost and will therefore be underpowered up to that point.
At best (if the balance point is uselessly placed somewhere between without-tier and with-tier), that dependence requires statics to funnel loot to the future carry in hopes that the spec won’t get their due nerfs until they’ve cleared the final fight, which is a sh*tty gamble to feel dependent upon.
I never claimed it could do its “full dps potential” in those conditions. I pointed out only that kiting and use of ranged tools make up a significant part of SV’s play in PvP. Failing to leverage either tends to leave you more dead and/or otherwise ineffective than is the case for most melee.
“While kiting” and “at ranged,” moreover, are not one and the same. You kite a melee while meleeing a clothie. Gap-closers double as escape tools; your ‘opener’ in Harpoon can double as guarantor for trap CC. And while the (slight) majority of SV’s damage may be melee, that only 2 of their attacks requires one to be in melee range does have its advantages.
SV is not a Warrior. It’s not a Rogue. It’s SV. It has greater uptime across range, but a hell of a lot less defensive and self-sustain value. “Melee DPS” not all interchangeable. That means leveraging different things: for SV, avoiding enemy melee uptime and frequently leveraging one’s ranged capacities is particularly key.
balance around having it if the end goal is everyone having it, tier was made accessible to everyone SO easily, so its fine to make it a must have and therefore according to you balanced. “acquire asap or be left behind” ye, its called progression its the point of the game, to work towards stuff such as gear, aka more strength. is everyone in here just a super whiney baby omg. you can balance with tier to match with tier players and non-tiers to match non-tier players they just dont care about both they just dont seem to test anything otherwise itd all be fine. if you really care about funneling gear to the “future carry” then youre too sweaty or really bad at the game.
The point of the game is not to simply rotate starkly different balance, let alone gameplay, states on the basis of “Has X reached their critical gearing point yet?”
No. There is such a thing as too much dependence on particular later-reached borrowed powers or other gearing thresholds. The more dependent a spec is on a future gearing threshold, and the farther that gearing threshold is, the harder it is to actually reach that threshold anyways. And that’s not even accounting for the negative impact on choice in content type.
Tier should be a noticeable reward, but not one that a given spec feels incomplete in its gameplay and/or starkly undertuned without.
I’m not sure what’s so complicated about this to you…
i think i struck a nerve with them when i more or less said that their status as the leader of a raiding guild allowed themselves to receive tier/more easily acquire tier. thus why it seems like such a non-issue
Please dont rework a spec to suit 1% of the player base.
(sorry for the delayed response on some parts, work week took a lot of focus)
Primarily this. Speaking broadly, a DoT-centric playstyle with a focus on management in maintenance and/or build-up.
Ah. Well, based on how they’ve made these spec pages for DF, it would/could look something like:
Munitions
Damage
A rugged tracker who favors shots augmented by animal venom and explosives, and enhanced traps, as deadly weapons.
Preferred Weapon: Bow, Crossbow, Gun
Primary Stat: AgilitySample Abilities
[
Explosive Shot][
Black Arrow]
While these new spec pages includes fewer sample abilities than they used to, for much, it’s quite similar to the old description page for the SV spec, prior to Legion. When they reworked it to melee, they just kept the prev description and later added the bit about ‘coordinated attacks with the pet’.
In the description above, you could ofc swap out Black Arrow to instead display the major CD; Munition Tactics.
While it would heavily depend on which talents you picked, and isn’t really about executing a “rotation”, you’d have a choice of priorities between the following abilities(priority level depending on talent choices and encounter scenarios):
Some of these are optional talent picks
Major cooldown:
Ease of acquisition is irrelevant. The fact the 4 piece bonus affects gameplay so much is a problem. It’s no different from the Raszageth bow, which is another example of why that approach is a problem.
If the 4-piece had been something like “Increases the crit chance of Fury of the Eagle based on the number of Mongoose Fury stacks you have upon use”, that would be more in line with the 2-piece set bonus while still acting as something that enhances without affecting the gameplay.
That’s what I was looking for. Thank you for the clarification.
???
Those “reworks” suggested were literally minor survivability (and perhaps sustained AoE) increases to deal with problems that become crippling around 23s. That does not mean those problems do not exist prior, nor that the “reworks” would somehow be at odds with what people would want even if they never reach M23s and up.
Parts of those suggestions, btw, changes have already met since the original (Feb 28th) post, so it’s clearly not some fringe suggestion.
Please at least read the contexts of posts before trying to make handwave any suggestion (or any ‘thank you’ for recording experiences where the problems become especially key) into an “elites vs. the masses” framework or the like.
An excessive and unfair weakness failing to outright unavoidably kill you until in a particularly unlenient setting doesn’t make it any less excessive or unfair, nor does it make correcting those issues something aimed only at the “1%”.
I was the last person in my guild to receive full tier because we set it up to get everyone 2 set then everyones 4 set and as RL to prevent the issue of complainers that i geared myself I took the gear last