Casual players does not mean sub optimal builds. Many players do the research, just don’t have the time. Many are just going to hit Icy veins or whatever and do the covenant highly suggested like we do with essences and corruptions regardless of the level of content.
making it a bigger pain in the butt will not level out the playing field nor make it so players that don’t work on their toons be suddenly accepted into the harder content.
Then why are you getting on the backs of those that are glad the set up will punish those that worship guides? That is the issue some are missing, there are players BLOCKED by other players for content that sub optimal builds can do. This is because some one read a guide and decided that was the only way to go.
Or we will choose the covenant we like based on other factors and play around/experiment/research how to do the best we can with that covenant.
Top end players, especially those that get world firsts, are leagues beyond the common player. They don’t follow guides because they have a deeper understanding of their class, they experimented and found out what worked best for their play style.
For instance, say Covenant A averages about 100k DPS, Covenant B averages 95k, C 90k and D 85k. One chooses covenant D and, through research and experimentation hits 100k DPS yet with Covenant A, which does not match their play style, they are lucky to hit even 70k DPS.
This player would be blocked from content because they are not using the highest average DPS covenant, yet that covenant is the worst for them due to other factors. It is the same as BM being the top hunter DPS spec, I can’t play BM on my hunter, yet I know MM quite well and can dish out the pain with that spec. This is because I do the research and everything for my chosen specs and work out how to min/max within that spec.
No they aren’t you can make your own groups that you choose not to isn’t the fault of people who want to be able to optimize their characters. Yes I’m getting on people who want to see others punished for wanting to optimize because frankly they are being cruddy people.
What?
54321
This is what I’m replying to that they choose not to make their own group isn’t the fault of “min maxers”
Sorry, came late to the party 
The only ones being “punished” for wanting to optimize are those that feel the only way to optimize is to follow a guide. Even Ralph said:
Get that through your head, he even goes on to say:
Now the issue is not the ones that want to optimize, it is the ones that feel that optimization means following a guide to the letter. In other words, if a guide says x covenant is best for y fight but a different covenant is best for another fight in the same instance, one can choose to be the best for one of the 2 fights, yet not both unless they can switch on the fly.
The only ones hurt by the current set up are the ones that want to optimize on a per fight basis, they can still optimize in general or broadly but no covenant will be the best for every single fight.
I can’t wait until the “player agency” buzzword dies. (mostly because while people use the term, they don’t actually want it)
“you think you do…”
Ralph has zero clue what they are talking about, and their contradictory words prove that. Also covenants as they are currently literally discourage experimentation if anything they make it more advantageous to wait for covenants to be solved mathematically since it will be difficult to change back. It encourages waiting to follow a guide instead of experimenting on your own. Also it’s more than just per fight it’s more per activity if I want to go raid then do M+ and then some pvp as unholy instead of blood I might want 3 different covenants for those activities.
Their choice is “I want everything”. My first wish is infinite wishes!
Good point.
This isn’t Blizzards vision. Raiders shouldn’t be able to swap on a dime and cancel out all the advantages PvPers have.
Which is incredibly dumb because there is a ton of crossover in playerbase.
I think there’s ambiguity behind that term.
It’s composed of 2 elements that get brought up a lot: Choices and Consequences.
Players requested choices. These choices all come with consequences - but the difference between the 2 sides is to what extent do the consequences spread.
The players asking for the ability to change covenant abilities are wanting the consequences at a content by content level.
The players that enjoy punishing other players want the consequences to cast as wide of a reach as possible - across roles/content/etc.
This is unfortunately accurate
Incorrect.
Players that min/max and try and optimize don’t always follow some guide.
There’s no way to create a single path guide for every single class combination of M+/Raid. Especially in M+ with affixes that change from week to week. One week players MAY CHOOSE to focus on single target and other aoe. Other weeks those same players MAY change things up for the new affixes.
In some cases - players change things up simply to change things up and try something different.
Guides are not some set of rules to follow - and many players don’t treat them as rules because they value being able to have choice and vary things up based on many variables that exist within the game.
Actually, I think Ralph is on the ball, and the “contradictory” nature of his words is because people can’t seem to think in anything but black and white.
Translated: I want to be able to switch to optimize for all content instead of work within the covenant I choose to be the best I can be even if I am at a disadvantage. However, you still might be able to switch in this style but it will come at a cost of some kind.
And that is why some go for a general st up that, while not the best in all content, will still be suitable for any content. No one will be the best in all content, nor should they be.
Agreed, but most of the arguments put forth by others, including myself, are calling out the ones that treat guides as such.
And, aside from covenant abilities, they will still be able to adjust some things. Soulbinds might be easier to change then covenant, there could easily be soulbinds that are more suited to AoE, more suited to single target, etc.
Until we see all aspects, covenants, soulbinds, how to change each, etc. It will be hard to say if the covenants really need to be able to change easily or at all. Even I can see needing to change at least the binds when you change specs (if they are not saved like talents). I also put forth an idea on how to get the other abilities at all times, prove yourself to one covenant and you get to keep their ability if you change.
I missed that. What was your idea?
And do you mean being able to use all the abilities at the same time - or just having all of them available to choose from, but only having one once you’re in combat?
The soulbinds should work like a balancing aspect of the Covenants. Or at least I don’t see any reason why they couldn’t or shouldn’t work like that.
Basically the Covenant active abilities have unique functionality, but the soulbinds provide passive benefits that can shore up the weaker areas of a specific Covenant.
If my Covenant doesn’t have a powerful aoe ability for my spec, there can still be an aoe soulbind that provides a similar throughput boost. The soulbinds being more like talents, that can be swapped around for specific dungeons and encounters, they should provide a lot of flexibility and allow for tuning.
It’d be, at a minimum, like talents, able to be switched in rest areas or with certain consumables (tomes).
hey kinda reminds me of all those fancy RPGs I’ve played, stuff like dungeons and dragons, divinity original sin, Fable, you know. RPGs with choices.
The covenant choice is your agency, you pick what suits you best and naturally everything has downsides.