Which would mean something if there was no other content after you choose.
1 Like
But when the value for us is punishing players - the negative impact it has on the player and other players they group with is increased.
The very fact that the punishment is compounded/exacerbated is what some of us enjoy about the system.
What? You made the argument that someone could choose a covenant and not realize that they got a pvp ability. Im saying that you get to play with all of them before making your choiceâŚmeaning you have an informed choice based on actual gameplay experience as to which way you want to go.
1 Like
You get to use all the abilities at the same time? That would be very strange and begs the question as to why they did it in the first place.
In reality - you choose long before you actually experience the challenging content.
Selecting something based on performance when you just hit max level is way different than when youâre in Heroic/Mythic Raids, 1600+ Arenas, and 10+ Mythic+ dungeons.
Thatâs one odd thing Iâve noticed about the system - it locks you in before youâve actually had a chance to see how things work in the actual âcontentâ WoW is valued for.
2 Likes
No you dont get to use them at the same time. You level with each of them in kind; then after reaching max level and playing with each of them for a while, you choose which youre going to stick with. The point is youre never going to choose out of ignorance, as whatever you choose, youve already played with for a while
I like that theyâre putting a choice in and Iâm hoping they keep it so itâs not just a toggle with a book like a talent. I think the only thing I would change is if an ability has literally no use in PVE or PVP for example. Like, if it doesnât function I would say a change is required. I think the mirrors talent for mages was said to be useless in PVE, but I havenât got to test it personally T.T .
I think your choice you make after playing with the talents to level should be sufficient, and yes, thereâs a difference between whatâs good at higher item levels and what not, but I mean, that also applies to classes as well. If people are content to listen to what the guide writers say is good and go for that extra 5% damage, they made a choice and thatâs fine. However, when a situation comes up where the other covenant on certain fights or content does like 30% better when itâs usually far behind, well, thatâs the dice.
If you can just swap it out whenever you like it, you didnât make a choice, you were at a buffet and just loaded up your plate with everything. And just because you had to switch to a spoon to eat your soup instead of your salad doesnât mean you made a meaningful choice. And in most situations if you want both, youâll probably end up paying more for it.
I think being able to see the difference in classes that chose different covenants is going to be super cool if people let it happen, however, Iâm concerned people are going to complain they canât change between pulls and itâs just going to be yet again, another pool of talents, probably earned through grinding reputation or earning tokens from some kind of daily so you can collect them all. Bleh.
1 Like
Itâs not just for X content, competitive people will have to level 4 of the same class due to buffs and nerfs.
Hypothetically speaking, as a PvPer who wants to take advantage of every little thing to win, and letâs say I play a Warrior, Iâm going to need to level four Orc Warriors and 4 Gnome Warriors.
Then Iâm going to need to gear all 8, which isnât a problem at all if they go back to honor/conquest gearing of the old days.
Not saying Iâm going to do this, but this is what the âhardcoreâ players will NEED to do to stay competitive.
you have 4 choices for each class that are equally good but do different things. It wouldnât be as fun if you could change your covenant whenever you wanted but instead making your choices matter which I prefer.
I think the choice still matters - and if the system was made so that you change the ability (using your analogy), it would be like having to choose a fork for an entire plate of food. Then, when you go back up for another plate - youâd be able to make another choice, but youâd be locked into only that choice for the second plate and so on.
This approach would still involve consequence, but limit it to the content level; all while INCREASING player agency, by allowing more choices to be made.
I can see how players would actually have MORE FUN if they could switch and keep making choices that were meaningful when they changed roles and content.
But what people donât understand is that the punishment of not being able to do that is what some of us find MORE FUN.
Being on a diet sucks - but itâs even better if you could force everyone else to adhere to the same diet.
being able to change covenant whenever you want doesnât make your choices matter like if it would if your choice was permanent
I know about the linear progression while leveling, but will the abilities be useable while youâre leveling, or do you have to choose a covenant first?
It would matter greatly to your raid, dungeon group, etc. if you could switch and make a choice that would be impactful to the people youâre playing with.
It actually has less significance when the system is based on a set-it and forget-it type of mentality.
But restricting choice and impact - while increasing punishment to players matters to a bunch of us; especially when those things are pushed onto everyone.
The value for us is the negative punishment applied to players just wanting to play the game well.
Right now, itâs like having all your utensils at your table within easy reach (because of the 10 silver cost books to change talents and such), so things like azerite and talents arenât very meaningful choices because you can change them on a whim at basically anytime. Where as in this case, theyâre trying to make these choices feel as important as choosing your class, which doesnât happen very often, and you canât just change by paying 10 silver to do so. I think itâs a waste of a good idea to make it so trivial again. People have been asking for meaningful choice forever, and when they finally did it, people are upset that they might not be able to change for every fight based on what would be best for that exact situation.
If you only have the money for soup or salad, (circling back), the choice you make matters, where as, if you just can get both, it doesnât matter at all. Or, raising the stakes, if you were offered a trip to universal studios or disney world, picking between those would be a choice and an experience to be had, and you might have to pay to see the other one and take some time working towards it. However, if you just know you can do both, you never had to make a choice, because obviously, youâre going to do both at some time and youâll just pick the one thatâs more appealing in that moment.
I donât think having a choice in the game that isnât so trivial as a toggle wonât hurt people, and can present a lot of fun and really see unique differences in character. And if people dictate that X power is the best power a majority of the time for this class, and you roll with people who say you have to do it or they wonât invite you, thatâs a choice too, to run with those kinds of people.
It certainly will make the race to world first interesting to watch again if the top players decide that leveling 4 of each class and gearing them is the way to be competitive in a pinch.
1 Like
I would argue that theyâre very meaningful.
Not only do they impact performance significantly - but the incite strategy, thinking, team-play, coordination, and communication.
You donât even have to pay anything to change your class. AND - when you swap to another character/class - you donât have to relevel them each time; you get to pick up right where you left off.
A choice able to be changed on the fly is a short term choice and therefore meaningless both as a personal conviction and in the grand scheme of things.
I disagree. It is entirely about choice. Is having to chose a race and a class at the beginning of the game âpunishmentâ? Of course not; it is creating a character with specific benefits and limitations. This is the same thing.
And I really wish people would stop using the word punishment incorrectly in order to spin Blizzardâs design in a negative light and make it seem personal. The word consequences is the accurate term in this situation.
4 Likes
Right - because they wanted choices.
Some of us want punishment to those that are trying to play well in multiple areas of the game.
This system doesnât provide fun for most players - which is why I like it.
Itâs not about the choice in Player Agency for us - itâs about the punishment and making sure others are exposed to it.
The choice is very meaningful to a large portion of the community - which is why not giving them potential choices is beneficial for some of us.
As I noted above - Agency for us isnât really about choice; itâs about punishment and consequences.
But the word punishment is specifically what some of us see as the positive light in the situation.
Why would we stop using it if itâs precisely the thing of value that is created with the system being restrictive?
Consequences is actually worse - because as others have noted, consequences would still exist in a system where players could change their abilities.