Who cares if nerd guilds want to turbo min max and double spec. Let them.
Normal people will be able to do dungeons and PVP at our leisure.
14 Likes
For retail, I personally prefer tank and healer classes for the faster queues.
I also like those roles more than seeing if I can beat someone else on a dps meter. So I for one would be more willing to tank / healer for dungeons (depending on the class I end up maiming). But being able to solo play when I’m not doing that would be great without having to go to a trainer and spend 50g and redo all my action bars and everything.
1 Like
Response 1 :
This always gets thrown up as the argument against dual spec. Let’s pretend you are correct and every serious guild requires this… Well the arguments for dual specs never want this sort of thing to happen either. So lets all agree that no one wants the ability to change specs mid raid and put some rules around what we allow.
An easy solution would be to lock your spec to the raid and require you to visit your class trainer like you do now and pay a reset fee of 50g if you want to change your spec during a raid. This solution makes no difference to how specs currently work for raiding but open up a whole lot of gameplay to players.
Response 2:
I don’t understand your point here sorry, but I don’t think keeping or removing this gold sink would really impact the economy either way.
Response 3:
I agree with you on we need to make some changes to align how the meta works and this is why I am pushing for dual specs. If you played back in the day you will know it was much more casual and there were more “any spec goes” (sure there were still the top guilds who didn’t follow this, but the casual player could just play the game without caring). These days you are lucky to get a dungeon invite if you are not in the right spec. This min max mentality that was reserved for a small percent the first time around is now filtering its way down to most casual players. This is where the requirement for dual spec comes in. Most of us want to chase PVP and PVE and to do this with the current community playing classic we need to be in the correct spec.
Response 4 :
tanks selling services for DPS gear is actually an argument for dual specs. It highlights the lack of tanks and healers we have for dungeons and that is what allows them to request such ridiculous prices / reserves. Allowing more people to switch to these specs should hopefully increase the chances of finding a tank / healer for a dungeon.
But even if it does not mean DPS players will magically switch to a tank spec where their class allows, it would mean the player who is usually a tank but has specced for their weekly arena is more willing to switch back to tank spec. If you think finding a tank / healer was bad in classic, wait till some of those players are off in their PVP spec grinding honour
3 Likes
Yep, Blizzard says so on its TBC Classic page…
“Burning Crusade Classic is a faithful recreation of the original release of World of Warcraft®: The Burning Crusade®.”
“Faithful” means “true to the original.” Modern WoW features like dual spec (and boosts) were not in the original and do not belong in TBC Classic.
As you said, if there are changes made, they should only be done with the goal of making the experience more true to the original, not less.
3 Likes
After talking to multiple people about dual spec in BC, here is my stance on the topic. I’d say:
-
Yes to dual spec, if it provides a way to have one PVE spec (only useable in PVE) and one PVP spec (only useable in PVP).
-
No to dual spec, if it provides a way to have 2 PVE or 2 PVP specs simply because it damages spec identity
2 Likes
Do you have this stored in a notepad somewhere and toy just copy and paste it in every thread without talking to the points brought up in the thread. I’m fairly certain this is the equivalent to “too long, didn’t listen”.
They did a faithful recreation of vanilla wow too, but a lot of people weren’t happy with that. They didn’t like the spell batching system, the world buff meta, the in-game boosting system with how xp works.
So blizzard is taking lessons learn on how the community has changed over the years and how unpolished their games were since at the time people didn’t take advantage of features they didn’t realize were there.
So boosts aside, blizz is “balancing” paladins (not faithful), removing spell batching (not faithful), changing drums in some way (not faithful), allowing tbc racss in prepatch (not faithful), using the modern lfg ui instead of the old (not faithful and honestly vastly superior)
So the term “faithful” is subjective here. Now if you’re argument is “well those are okay because of balance and we need that but no dual spec that’s not faithful” then that’s your opinion. Which brings us to why we are having this debate in the first place.
People are making their case to blizzard and its up to blizzard to decide. But it is a feature a large group of people want blizz to add. Evidence from outside these forums show that to be the case. You have popular Twitter and YouTube wow personalities doing polls of some 20k players with a majority (not 51% either, more in the 70-80% range) wanting dual spec. You have the poll that was made here on the forums that show they want it. The threads on both classic subreddits have a ton of up votes and support in them (and you know those subs are notorious for people downvoting so to have a positive score you need more up voters than down and them some).
Then for the anecdotal evidence of every person I’ve spoken to in game and out have said they want this feature. This is from my guild, dungeon pugs, and open world elite quest pugs.
2 Likes
Regardless of conclusions, lots of healthy and polite reasoning going on here.
2 Likes
You can have two specs in raid now, just go the extra mile for it. If it is that important go the distance.
2 Likes
Except this is not a democracy, or shouldn’t be. Players do not know what is good for themselves. The history has proven this over and over. And so they need an adult to stick to the overarching design philosophy and goals and make the decisions for them.
If you poll players and ask them if they want more options and conveniences and free $hit handed to them, the majority is pretty much always going to say yes, because they are human and thus ignorant, weak, selfish, and short-sighted. And if Blizzard listens to polls when it comes to game design, the players will end up ruining their own game, every single time. It happened with retail, and it will happen again with Classic if Blizzard goes down that path again.
You don’t let the rats design the maze.
3 Likes
You are entirely right, all we can do is present blizzard with our opinions and let them decide what they’re going to do.
Which means if you don’t like a certain feature it would be in your best interest to present an actual argument about why it’s bad instead of just ranting #nochanges, especially since blizzard is giving that a lot less weight for TBC Classic.
1 Like
The OP^^ did a pretty good job of that, and I gave it a like, and made a post supporting one of his points.
1 Like
His only actual valid point was his first point, IE people switching specs every 5 minutes. Which is very easily solved by simply adding a cool down to switching and I’m willing to bet most people in favor of dual spec would be perfectly fine with that.
2 Likes
I like his point about what #somechanges means, or should mean.
Blizzard has a stated design philosophy of an “authentic Classic experience” or “a faithful recreation.” And I think it would be best if it sticks to that.
#nochanges was too rigid, and it got us the world buff meta and player-provided boosting services in Classic vanilla, which completely changed the game and made it very inauthentic and unfaithful to the original experience.
#somechanges is a better philosophy, IMO, to provide flexibility to counter unintended player-exploited flaws in the game design that make the game inauthentic and unfaithful if left in the hands of modern players.
But, IMO, changes should only be done with that^^ goal in mind. Not because the majority of players want this modern feature or that modern feature according to some online poll, because that would not be consistent with the stated design philosophy.
4 Likes
48 hour CD would be fine with me tbh.
Really? Do you have data to back that up? I am willing to bet that without the capability of being able to spec swap in retail, there would be a far worse shortage of tanks in the game let alone tanks that are willing to queue with pugs. On the point of pugs: not all tanks wish to pug and subject themselves to the absent minded players that come with playing with random players. Some people prefer playing with others while on voice comms or people they are familiar with. Your assumption that being able to change talents on the fly hasn’t improved the number of tanks is a large assumption based on nothing but conjecture.
1 Like
This is wrong. It didn’t change the game. People have all of the info and it spreads quickly like a brush fire because of the amount of youtubers and repositories that are available today when compared to back then.
I agree with your post. This quote in particular I would that agreeing to a few changes for balance and then saying no to dual spec is hypothetical. Dual spec would help balance. There would be more healers and tanks because that dps warrior or boomkin can now have the convenience of changing to prot or resto and queuing for a dungeon as that spec when they probably would not have without dual spec.
No dual spec = less tanks and healera in queues.
Dual spec = more tanks and healers in queues.
It’s difficult to refute this or uphold it because we just don’t have the evidence to support both sides.
The only argument against dual spec would be that it wasn’t in the original. There is no other valid argument other than that.
This is why literally the first sentence in what you quoted by me said “the final decision is up to blizzard”… so im not sure how that means it’s a democracy with a vote by people… im saying the support is there… so it’s up to blizz to decide if they want to entertain the idea or not.
I meant modern players exploiting flaws in the game design changed the game experience. In original vanilla, almost nobody stacked world buffs. In Classic vanilla, almost everyone does. That makes for a very different experience, and removing them from raids would have made Classic vanilla a more authentic and faithful experience.
It’s the same with drums. In original TBC, raids didn’t have everyone w/ LW and stacking drums. But in Classic TBC, had they left the game intact, everyone would have, which would have made the game experience less authentic and faithful to the original. And this is the point of #somechanges, IMO, and I think its use should be limited to that.
I don’t think that it means, okay, everyone brainstorm and think about what changes you’d like to see, and then we’ll take polls and introduce the changes that score higher than 50% and create a brand new game altogether. There is no surer way to ruin the game, IMO. Given the option, players will crap in their own bed.
I’m just saying that I hope that Blizzard doesn’t treat it like a democracy. They need to not give those players what they say they want, IMO. For their own good.