When since November 23 , 2004 has Blizz been able to balance anything involving WoW and classes ? And yet more classes got added between then and Legion
2 Likes
Coming from someone who hasnāt played WoW since TBC, the only class Iāve farmed a leggo for is Hunter. Iām loving BM but also enjoy Survival. In fact, I Amosts made a second character just to have a survival hunter on the sideā¦
Man, I am all about choice. Options. I donāt think Iāve ever said that something shouldnāt be added to the game. At least not seriously. I do like to poke fun sometimes when someone makes what I think is a silly demand. But in this regard, nah. I can legit appreciate people want RSV back. I want Frost tanking, DW Uholy, and DW/2h Blood DPS back for DKs. I will never understand Blizzards penchant for removing things from the game that have already been established. Adding new things, heck yeah. Bring it! But donāt remove whatās already there.
Yeah, adding things is good. Taking them away is bad. See my above response.
I have two Hunters at 60 (and a gaggle of alt Hunters, almost as many as I have DKs), one is BM and the other is SV. Fly, baby bird, fly!
This really was a question of impossible balance + being ridiculously OP. When all three specs in a class can dps and tank, it makes any semblance of balance impossible, and makes them really hard to beat in pvp.
I still miss themā¦ 
SVās biggest problem is numbers, but its design does need a bit of work. The rotation is great, but itās only great because of Mongoose Bite and Wildfire Infusion complimenting each other. Without either of those talents, the quality of the rotation instantly plummets. Both of those talents need to become baseline already so Blizz can keep building on the spec (and so I can finally take Chakrams without giving up Wildfire Infusion).
Yeah sure, but why is it a concern of yours?
Like has been said alreadyā¦
- Blizzard has never refrained from changing things or implementing new things (classes/specs) in the past based on a concern for balance.
- The level of balance we see now is more or less going to be the same even if they add 1 more spec.
- The act of not adding one more spec to the game wouldnāt magically result in them suddenly stepping up their game on the balancing front.
So, again, why make this an argument of balancing/tuning when that, within reason, isnāt a factor anyway?
Agreed.
1 Like
Haha is it worthwhile having 2 of the same class at 60 vs just respeccing when I want?
Iād think itās a pretty common concern, and just because Blizz is bad at balancing doesnāt mean we shouldnāt be concerned. In fact, Iād say thatās the very reason we should be! I mean look how many threads people make about balancing, thereās hundreds if not thousands of them.
Anyway. Like I said before. I am not arguing against a 4th spec. Not at all. I was just expressing a concern I have.
Heh, thatās a subjective question. I think it is, but I make characters based more on concept than class. But itās really up to you, do you think itās worth it?
1 Like
Right, but the point is, theyāre going to be bad at balancing regardless. People still play poorly performing specs if they find it fun to play, so balancing should be a small concern if one at all when it comes to adding new specs and/or classes.
3 Likes
Heh, yeah tell me about it. I play melee Survival.
2 Likes
Honestly, I respect people who play what they want regardless of the meta.
I just want my old arcane archer back in some form xD. I donāt want to take away options from anyone.
3 Likes
Man, I tell you what. I would love a Dark Ranger or Arcane Archer type class/spec. But if I am being really honestā¦ If I could design a new ranged class for wow it would be a dual wield pistol/hand crossbow āGunslingerā type. Theyād have a second healer spec, and maybe a third alternative dps or even some kind of insane ranged tank. But that might be beyond Blizzardās capabilities. So maybe not. Conceptually theyād wear leather, but being it is the most widely used armor type in the game mail might be a better choice. Only problem is a ranged firearm using mail wearer is so close to Hunter it will would probably never fly.
But then why bring that concern up in context of a discussion that is aimed at giving us a 4th spec? If it has nothing to do with the addition of said 4th spec.
Even if it wasnāt your intent, saying that makes it seem as if you ARE making an argument that a 4th spec should not be added ābecause balanceā¦ā.
<3
1 Like
Because it is a valid concern.
I think what people are concerned about though is given the context, it initially appears as a condemnation of a fourth spec. I totally understand thatās not what youāre arguing against here, just a note about why I think people are confused.
Personally, since weāre never going to achieve perfect balance and I am all for playing what I enjoy regardless of how it performs, Iām not so worried about a 4th spec nor do I think it would really take away from other specs from getting their time in the lime light so to speak.
1 Like
Sure, but given the context of the situation, if itās not your intent to use it as an argument against adding a 4th spec, perhaps this isnāt the best time to bring it up? In threads where class and spec balancing is the subject of matter, by all means.
Yep.
1 Like
I read this as satire, I hope you are not serious brother. Explosive shot is what I loved about survival combined with dots and traps. I wish survival could atleast use explosive shot from the marksman tree.
Just sharing my thoughts on this here forum of public discussion.
Yeah, i remember- the cause for renaming them is to stop conflict with aspect of the cheta and aspect of the turtle