And weve done that. Dual spec defies TBC game design and thus ruins the TBC immersion, or makes it not-TBC.
BNET doesn’t do that.
2 Likes
There are loads that “don’t add value” in the sense of generating enjoyment. They are there as disincentives and time gates. They’re meant to be cumbersome. Repair costs, rep grinds, longwinded attunements, niche abilities that force specific raid compositions.
2 Likes
How does dual spec defy TBC design, respeccing exists in TBC…
To be perfectly fair, the number of people who will contribute to improving the dungeon situation with dual spec will be even smaller than that portion. Microscopically small, because we know dual spec would barely touch group forming problems.
Yes but it is time and gold gated. This isn’t by accident either. It’s intentional and by design that there are no class trainers in Outlands, and that the fee caps at 50g. It’s not an oversight, they wanted it to take a little time and cost a little gold.
Bear in mind that people were requesting respec cost decreases and dual spec right at the beginning of TBC. They knew players wanted it and chose not to implement changes then. It wasn’t an accident. Throughout TBC they could have easily put class trainers into Outlands and reduced respec costs, if they wanted to.
We don’t have a TBC design map, but we know how the design team responded to these same requests back in TBC and from that we can infer their design goals - they did nothing. They left it for WoTLK.
1 Like
The ability to freely swap between 2 different specs with zero consequence is absolutely a major change in TBC character management.
4 Likes
But it will be more than zero 
Again, you’re arguing for the inclusion of a thing based on how popular it is as a concept, which isn’t really a viable method to argue whether an expansion that has a very specific design should be completely changed from that design to support features that never existed during it’s time.
1 Like
I’d argue, not enough to justify it’s early implementation.
We know it did very little in that regard in WoTLK. It was fun and it was popular but many more changes had to be implemented before any real dent was made into the issue of slow group forming.
3 Likes
Kasta, if anyone asks for proof about what the majority wants, just link this to them:
So, like I said in one of the other threads, why is it ignored that this issue will basically address itself in a patch or two?
Dailies make the complaint of cost completely irrelevant, and the group forming tool will heavily mitigate the difficulties of group formation to the point that both of these major sticking points for pro-dual spec become meaningless.
1 Like
I’m still waiting to hear how dual spec is contradictory to TBC design.
Ok. Attempt #8262664939286:
TBC was designed with being one spec in mind. It is a class-specialty based expansion, very different from the “bring the player not the class” design of WOTLK, when DS was added.
It is important to the experience that you pick a single spec, and that there is consequence to your choices should want to change that or drastically change how your character plays the next day on a whim. The game design supports an element of permanence to your chosen spec.
Dual spec flaunts this aspect completely and makes this dynamic invisible, for most classes.
2 Likes
So if this is an issue that should be addressed why not just address it now?
Because I think you can handle waiting a month or two or three, if it means TBC isn’t permanently disfigured.
2 Likes
How would TBC be “permanently disfigured”?
Because it would move further away from being true-tbc.
Some changes, OK w/e, but #notallchanges.
Dual spec falls in to the category of “nope”.
2 Likes
So beyond #nochanges
How does it hurt TBC Classic?
Is there an echo in here? Riger I could have sworn this question was both asked and answered already, am I going crazy?
2 Likes
Both of you have not provided any reason beyond #nochanges
1 Like