I know this system likely has flaws, However I want to play with the system first how it was designed before changes are made. If a majority of the player-base hates it after that then sure, change it. However I don’t like how people are trying to force this change before it’s even live, especially when a vast majority of the player-base hasn’t even seen the system yet.
1 Like
I too would like to wait this out until the forums go absolutely bonkers.
For science.
I dont even think the forums will go bonkers. From what I’ve seen it’s no worse than artifact weapons were and those were actually received rather well.
Obviously you’ll have some complainers, this thread alone proves that. However I will be shocked if it’s worse received than something like corruptions.
And this is why the forums will go nuts, lack of information about what’s coming.
I haven’t played through the questing myself but I can easily see how it makes sense.
While all the covenants have the same common goal, their most pressing issue is the Anima shortage which alleviating this seems to be one of your most immediate goals. By leaving a covenant for another, you’re basically telling them “Hey, you’re not important enough for the Anima I’m collecting. You can continue to starve, I’m gonna go help them instead.”
But wouldn’t we want to help all 4 covenants in order to restore the balance .
1 Like
Blizzard Balancing
Hey at least the threads will have more support when the greater audience gets to play it.
1 Like
Pull that ripcord baby. We love Strawberry milk.
#PULLTHERIPCORD
1 Like
I think it’s more obvious than that because of how it has been explained, and what has been shown in the Alpha and Beta testing. You can get a pretty good overview of concerns from that, and it’s why the game has those testing options; not just to look for gaming bugs but to see how the systems will work when implemented.
I feel that the idea of Covenants is fine - what I don’t like is yet another attempt on their part of forcing people to do something because it’s better than doing something else. Covenants should provide player abilities certainly but they should be able to earned from every one of them, not just one.
If they were effectively talents that we could access for particular situations, it would give players so much more choice in how they play the game. I wouldn’t even object if there was a cost (though not too large a one) in swapping a talent selection. Early on, you had to pay a substantial amount of gold to swap your specs and that was very unpopular and we eventually had it removed. But if, say, you decided you needed to activate your Venthyr talents and that cost 50 Anima to do, then most people wouldn’t object to that since Anima is something we earn during gameplay anyhow. In fact, it would promote wider gameplay out in the world.
I just think there are more options than this ‘straightjacket’ effect of tying us into one Covenant, or making multiple alts when that’s not what a player may enjoy doing.
2 Likes
Not sure about Strawberry Milk… but ya’ll like sweet tea?
#PullTheRipCord
the mods only take down threads that actually are breaking the rules.
Artifact weapons recieved well? In what world did that happen? Rogues got screwed over multiple time and if you wanted to play other specs sucks to be you. For the first 2 major patches it was a hated system by the majority
1 Like
Down a glass of something alcoholic every time you see the hashtag.
This again?
I personally think the systems provide an interesting experience for the player base, yes some convenants will be better for certain tasks for specific classes but to be honest we already have that we classes in particular. You could pick a covenant to give you more aoe options as a heavily capped class to make yourself more appealing to m+ or you could double down on single target for raiding. The possibilities are definitely interesting.
Obviously there will be best classes and covenants to have for each dungeon or raid, and some guilds and pugs will even try to enforce those but in the end if you really want to do content you will find a group of like minded people and get it done.
I do agree that this is a very divisive issue but that also means that Blizzard has picked something that will provide a significant effect for the expansion.
Honestly if the systems each expansion do not try to be unique and provide challenges for the players then we would be better served by just straight up gear choices and no borrowed power systems. I do think though that the lack of complexity in such a world would not hold player interest for very long and it will be a very quick end to the game.
Remember this game has to compete now with both the older versions of itself and other competitors in the market so expansive and intricate systems are required to hold interest beyond just clearing the raids/mythics.
As someone who has felt from the beginning that abilities should not be tied to covenants themselves, I voting to pull the ripcord.
This would be 1:1 if some abilities had been locked away in someone else’s class hall.
Initially a ton of people hated artifact weapons. They were a nauseating grind that locked people out of specs. It wasn’t until the inevitable catch up mechanics that people started warming up to them. Legion was not well received at first.
This one, Artifact weapons were generally received very well as well as artifact power at launch. Yes there were some complaints by the usual “I cant keep my alts caught up” Crew but by the majority the were liked.
I wouldn’t even say a ton of people hated them. At legion’s launch most of the hate were for legendaries, Artifacts were mostly praised.
2 Likes