No one is doing that.
If you don’t like Vanilla, then don’t play Vanilla. If you’re talking about a ‘Classic+’ type server, then whatever. I’m speaking of people trying to change these fresh servers.
But as far as the Classic+…people need to temper their expectations. The classic team is very, very small. And let’s be honest…not the best programmers or designers at Blizzard. SoD is their vision of Classic+.
You’re infering this is the case but even if it is, it’s up to the rest of us to tell them why SoD is not what people who wanted Classic+ were looking for, and to help them understand Vanilla design so they can evolve it forward.
If we don’t, who else will? SoD and Vanilla are not even remotely in the same ballpark.
This right here. I’ve completely given up trying to reason with people like him. They are a plague upon this community because they don’t offer anything to the topic at hand. Anyone with half a brain can tell there’s a massive difference between SoD, Classic, and Classic+. Those denying it are either stupid or in denial for whatever reason. It’s really cringe too people who say things like “you already got SoD”, like we asked for it or something. Yeah man, I wanted to play a version of classic were all DPS besides hunters can fill a hybrid role. Classic+ is intended to be small gameplay tweaks, an expanded world, new dungeon raid content, and new questlines. Not the porting of 8-9 retail abilities into each class. I really dislike insulting people on the forum but like how stupid can you be? It’s just sad.
Plenty of people playing SoD. So it seems like it is what those people want.
I forget where, but Blizz themselves called SoD an experiment. It is NOT Classic+. It’s the testing ground for stuff to make an ACTUAL Classic+ that doesn’t go Wild West on everything.
It’s been mentioned in numerous interviews by Aggrend and various other devs on the classic wow team. You can’t reason with these people though unfortunately.
I admit that I’m mostly in the #nochanges camp, but I can admit to benefits of things when there’s merit in them and they don’t harm the game. I haven’t read through the whole thread, but when I see a lot of people ask for changes it’s about sweeping change, and that’s a no-no.
Previously mentioned, a lot of the problems are player made… The community for Classic WoW is, frankly, awful. That said, though, we shouldn’t be altering too many things when it comes to the topic of class balance. Nothing should fundamentally change the play of a class because in reality, they’re all fine as they are. They can survive in the game as is if people were able to stop being so obtuse.
If there truly was something to change though, buffs and tweaks should be a numbers game only, not implementing new abilities. If mana regen is an issue, buff it for some classes or reduce spell costs slightly. If damage numbers are too far between then increase them a little or maybe increase proc % on some skills. Changes should never be anything drastic, just a little patch to make things more bearable.
I’m also of the opinion you shouldn’t just start throwing classes new abilities as a bandaid. I’m in favor of more turtle wow esq changes. Little changes that go along way. Mana for hybrid DPS is a big issue though, perhaps modifying talents to get mana return on usage is the answer? Also, spell school resistances for certain raids is an issue.
Real RPGs offer a variety of experiences including the experience of not being the best or close to being the best class or spec. If that imparity isn’t there then neither is your class/spec choice - you’re just a role, not a role player.
This is a product of RPG mechanics that I feel shouldn’t be touched. Shooting a massive fireball at an elemental made of fire shouldn’t hurt it. Just be thankful it doesn’t heal it, lmao.
As for mana returns and talents, its gets to be a little bit more slippery slope because you can’t have them be too powerful or things that other roles of the same class would also take. Anything talent based would need to be baked into capstone talents far in the tree, but then you start to get into custom content kinda realm. I haven’t played Turtle so I’m not sure what they do, but I’m pretty firm you just need numbers adjustments.
For example, a lot of big power budget abilities like Stormstrike for Shaman is like… 21% of base mana or something, and if you dont gear for intellect it obviously eats a ton of mana. Toning that down slightly to like 18% would help make things a little more manageable.
I don’t think any changes to be made should fully change the position of a class in the hierarchy, just make them not as scorned so more of your average players are willing to accept them at face value.
Resistances do make sense in an RPG stand point, but god does it feel bad gameplay wise. For me, at the end of the day its a game and we are meant to have fun. Is it fun to not be able to play fire mage for MC/BWL because of resistances? How about Ele for AQ40? To me the fun outweighs the RPG aspects. If it were up to me, the only time resistances should matter is in PvP, and against tanks (ex. fire res sets etc.). All a matter of opinon though.
it’s not, the vanilla devs confirmed that loot rarity basically increased based on group size numbers. They also added some variance to that logic, to give more progression on each size too (like how theres gear you can get while solo leveling that are green/blue/purple.)
That is why the 40m raids had the most powerful gear. It was more a challenge to get 40 nerds together in one room for 3 hours a night.
Sure, that makes sense, but this line of thinking is what killed off pretty much all RPG aspects in later iterations of the game. Having ammo to manage as a hunter wasn’t fun, you lost a whole bag and running out mid dungeon/raid felt awful. Having to craft poisons or level lockpicking as a rogue was a massive chore. All these little things don’t really make the game “fun” but they make it feel more like a world instead of a game. The reason a lot of people who are #nochanges are because they like these RPG mechanics and the validation or reasonings behind all the clunk and clutter.
Definitely okay to feel otherwise, but its just one aspect of the game that makes it truly feel unique or enjoyable, the reward in the struggle. People don’t want to lose that… Sometimes we want to suffer.
this is what I find interesting. I loved having to feed my pet, having ammo, things like that. But EVERYONE else I’ve spoken to who plays hunter avidly, disagrees. seems like NOT everyone wants to suffer.
There definitely should be some struggle and should be some jank, I agree. However, I feel there is a big difference between things like constantly stocking drinks, ammo, leveling skills etc and being able to perform the dps role at a fundamental level. All those things you listed are just minor inconveniences that help the player feel immersed in the world itself. At a certain point though, we are all playing a video game. Not being able to do damage to certain bosses is crossing the line of inconvenience. It becomes exclusion at that point, and not allowing a player to engage in a form of content based on a choice made at the character select screen isn’t good design imo.
I think the issue is there’s just better games out there if I really wanted those kinds of mechanics.
Similarly with dual spec, if I wanted a game where spec really mattered it wouldn’t be WoW with or without dual spec.
Would you say the same about Baldur’s Gate or other RPGs where the character you create and decisions you make will lock you out of certain content or going down a certain path?
That’s the thing, is that specs aren’t hard locked and if you can’t use your fire spells against a fire elemental then you use your frost spells. I think you’re caught up more on the amount of DPS and optimalization(?) of certain classes.
You’re never locked out of content, just not able to do it the specific way you want and that’s not bad game design. I’m all for helping out the little guy to make stuff more accepted, but as others have said - not everything needs to be competitive or usable 100% of the time. Agree to disagree on these points, though, and I understand that it’s not enjoyable for you to not be able to do exactly what you want but that’s just the charm for a lot of us.
not everything about a game has to “feel good” 
spec absolutely matters in WoW tho
I’m really happy you used BG3 as an example because I think it represents a lot of things here. To start with, BG3 is a single player game. You aren’t required to interact with other players in order to reach your goals. Outside of professions and questing (excluding group quests obviously) classic wow is designed where player interaction is required to progress your character. While in a game like BG3 you can make suboptimal choices in the way you create, and build your character and that’s fine. You are the only one affected by your choices. When it comes to Wow, the way you build/play your character affects all those you group with. While this game is solved and easy to clear, humans by nature desire the path of least resistance. This often leads to gatekeeping players with suboptimal builds who play something for “flavour”.
Also just a little side note, at any point in time during BG3 you can completely recreate your character via the npc Withers. So, even if you gimped yourself at character creation you can go back and fix it. Larian are genius’s when it comes to game design and realized that players shouldn’t be able to make mistakes at character creation.