When certain classes become so meta that people are forced to play that class to participate in Mythic + that is a problem. People like me like to play their favorite class rather than switch to a meta class. So Blizzard should tune Mythic + by classes. Meta classes should gradually be nerfed and classes not being played consistently should be buffed to maintain a balance of class play. The goal should be participation of all classes rather than the formation of meta class teams that dominate to the exclusion of other classes that want to play Mythic +. Prove me wrong.
13 Likes
Makes sense to me, so long as participation isn’t the only metric but just the main metric.
4 Likes
All specs already participate
Stop being a meta slave and just play what you want.
99.9% of players arent playing at a level where not being meta is whats holding them back
17 Likes
Participation is not a good metric.
It’s easily exaggerated and what about classes that just naturally pull more players?
Should Monk always be strong and Hunter weak just because Hunter is a popular architecture?
Unless you’re narrowing it down to say, the top 500 players?
Why make global balance changes just to shake up the tip of the Pyramid? There will always be a handful of specs that dominate at that level.
1 Like
could you provide an example for a formula that would achieve this?
For PUGs there are some classes that get invited more than others. It gets old to wait for an invite or never get one if your class is not a chosen one. M+ is only fun if you can play once in a while rather than waiting and waiting. What is the point? So if your class never gets invited then WOW should start buffing up that class until it gets invited. Keep the waiting times more consistent.
1 Like
What makes you the think the developers intent is something OTHER than Paladin Tanks being God Mode, just to give one example?
I mean… they intentionally MADE them God Mode a couple months ago.
1 Like
That’s a bad idea. Monks, rogues, and similar classes have consistently been among the least played, while paladins, druids, and hunters are almost always the most played, regardless of their tier.
Buffing monks and rogues just to make them more popular won’t fix the issue because lack of power isn’t why people avoid them. Monks have a thematic and aesthetic that doesn’t appeal to everyone, and their playstyle often feels niche or overly complex compared to other classes. Rogues, while effective, rely heavily on stealth mechanics and tend to lack the visual impact or versatility of more popular classes.
The problem isn’t their performance; it’s that their design doesn’t resonate with a broader audience.
3 Likes
This doesn’t make sense. Some classes get players just by being fun classes to play and some don’t get participation for the opposite reason.
3 Likes
Typically balance doesn’t actually aim for evenly balanced in the first place… it doesn’t matter what game it is, devs usually balance in ways that shift the meta around… it just isn’t always as often as we as players may like aor as consistent… on occasion even, a change that was meant to push one class into the spotlight for a season may actually act as a nail in the coffin for it instead due to poorly thought out mechanics… for example fire mage could get some massive buffs to its long cast time spells the longer they remain in one spot, but if bosses that tier/season require a lot of movement, then this sort of change may feel like a nerf instead… because of this sometimes classes that have been underperforming for multiple seasons continue to do so until boss mechanics in a season permit the class to shine for a change… we can give countless essays on why they should balance this way or that… and at the end of the day they will keep doing it how they always have.
1 Like
It’s not just the individual specs that determines meta; it’s the combinations and how they align with that season’s dungeon pool. Players stumble onto a comp that synergizes well and can reliably handle that season’s challenges, then it gradually becomes the consensus that competitive players gravitate to. Should they nerf those specs to underperform in order to break that up? What about players who have been maining those specs for years? They can’t help their spec became meta.
On the flip end, if a spec has historically low popularity, how far should they buff it to get players to play it?
Just thoughts going through my head when I consider your proposal. 
That’s a community problem. They see pros and streamers running a certain comp because it has a 1% advantage in +18s and think that’s what they need to do to get past their +7 brick wall.
News flash: that 1% advantage goes away for the 99.9% of the player base that doesn’t properly coordinate with their group and play their specs perfectly in the first place. The “meta” is the fault of the players.
3 Likes
And that same 99.9% of players want to pretend it does, and think a 0.01% different in performance is going to make the difference in winning or not. Every guild I’ve ever been in has wanted to pretend their wanna-be-but-never-gonna-be guild should act at least in some ways like the WF guilds.
1 Like
Fun fact. BrM has been the absolute bottom tier tank (by a wide margin) the entire expac with zero fixes from blizz.
1 Like
Quite literally, every class is viable and most “meta” chat is a complete illusion. Go ahead and check Murlok IO for example, there is representation for every spec, every hero talent, even at the absolute highest level.
People play these things. F the “meta” tbh.
That being said, buff all other tanks to be at Prot Pally level. That one is a legitimate concern
1 Like
This would be so freaking horrible. Holy Priest is generally popular and thus always forgotten and undertuned. I would hate to see us suck even more because popularity metrics are involved.
What Blizzard really needs is to prune classes like Shaman who have an answer to everything. Why do they have the shortest interrupt that is also ranged, cap totem, hex, binding totem, tremor, wind rush, earthen wall, astral form, ghost wolf, lust etc etc. You get the point? They have so much utility it makes every other class obsolete. It’s the same with evokers who have an AOE soothe, a mcguffin dispel that does it all, a baseline dispel, tons of stops, etc. Too many classes have too much. It used to be that each class had SOME things, but not everything. Priest for example used to be unique in that it could dispel magic and diseases. But then every class got magic dispel + kept their old dispels, severely taking away a niche that Priest had.
1 Like
They may take our lives, but they will never take our PI
1 Like
TBH I think the biggest roadblock to M+ balance is that they do not design classes for M+, they design them for raid and at best, tune them for M+.
Utility is the most glaring example of this.
Like Mages and Shamans bring both Bloodlust AND an incredible buff in AI or Windfury and then you’ve got Warlocks which have Healthstones and Portals. Incredible utility for raid mind you, but pretty mediocre for M+. Or Prot Paladins and their infinite utility and infinite interrupts, vs Blood DK’s who bring Grip.
In Raid this isn’t a problem. You can fit basically everyone in in a Mythic Raid team. In M+ though, you only got 5 slots.
Prot Paladins are a utility gap moreso than a tuning one. Other tanks have a lot more CC than Prot Paladins have, but Blizzard absolutely gutted short-duration CC by removing it’s ability to interrupt stuff, so Prot Paladins kinda just coasted on to the top by being the only Tank that largely dodged the CC change.
There is no way you just said healthstones are mediocre for M+
2 Likes
You do know the only reason people played off meta specs was the wowhead “break the meta” promo, right?