Elitist Jerks - View Single Post

ceasefire · 06/09/08, 10:14 AM

Well thought out post, and some great food for thought without being laced with poisonous salty tears.

I agree with you that the talents and specs do not *have to be that way.* But I think once you start trying to balance every tree to have utility in both PvE and PvP, the combinations become so staggering in number it becomes impossible to test/control every factor. We all know most trees have a bunch of crappy filler talents, but having all great talents that work well for both sides of the game means broken combinations and other problems can rise far too frequently. A good analogy might be a trading card game, where if you have too many broken cards or mechanics, it creates imbalance.

It would be nice if Blizzard had the time to reevaluate talent trees every patch, but based on their class evaluations pre-bc, I think the design is behind a slow and steady approach. Certain talents are clearly overpowered and have been for quite some time (Cheat Death, Intercept, Mortal Strike, among others). And I truly feel the company has done a good job of toning down a lot of the problem areas (spammable PoM, 40 second fears) with the DR system and adjustments.

The pertinent question with WOTLK is "can it be viable/sustainable for every class to have three talent trees that harmonize well for PvP and PvE?" I think the answer is it's a logistical nightmare and extremely difficult.

In regards to your salient points about battlegrounds, I think the reason behind BG's is basically the general human tendency to "get by with the least amount of effort possible." If you're getting respectable honor gain while losing every game and failing to achieve objectives, there really is no incentive to play hard (or in the case of EOTS, learn the rules). Maybe rated Battlegrounds would remedy that; I don't see very many alternatives.

And yes, adding PR to ilvl 159 epics but capping it out at 1600-1700 is just ridiculous. It's like the worst of both worlds, you displease the hardcore Arena players and the crybabies. Might as well have no cap or a cap starting at 1750 all the way through 2400. I think when you saw a Warrior with Ash'kandi, Dark Edge of Insanity, Might of Menethil, or even Rank 14 weapons you used to run in terror. When you saw/see a Warrior with Torch of the Damned or Cat's Edge or Apolyon, you would definitely show respect (before Hyjal/BT became mass market). That feeling of awe at the difficulty of obtaining an item should return in my opinion. Limiting all such items to a strict percentage (or rating) is a good idea but needs to be taken further.

06/09/08, 10:14 AM	#479 (permalink)
ceasefire Metagame Metagame Gnome Warrior <BlitzKrieg> Dragonmaw	Well thought out post, and some great food for thought without being laced with poisonous salty tears. I agree with you that the talents and specs do not have to be that way. But I think once you start trying to balance every tree to have utility in both PvE and PvP, the combinations become so staggering in number it becomes impossible to test/control every factor. We all know most trees have a bunch of crappy filler talents, but having all great talents that work well for both sides of the game means broken combinations and other problems can rise far too frequently. A good analogy might be a trading card game, where if you have too many broken cards or mechanics, it creates imbalance. It would be nice if Blizzard had the time to reevaluate talent trees every patch, but based on their class evaluations pre-bc, I think the design is behind a slow and steady approach. Certain talents are clearly overpowered and have been for quite some time (Cheat Death, Intercept, Mortal Strike, among others). And I truly feel the company has done a good job of toning down a lot of the problem areas (spammable PoM, 40 second fears) with the DR system and adjustments. The pertinent question with WOTLK is "can it be viable/sustainable for every class to have three talent trees that harmonize well for PvP and PvE?" I think the answer is it's a logistical nightmare and extremely difficult. In regards to your salient points about battlegrounds, I think the reason behind BG's is basically the general human tendency to "get by with the least amount of effort possible." If you're getting respectable honor gain while losing every game and failing to achieve objectives, there really is no incentive to play hard (or in the case of EOTS, learn the rules). Maybe rated Battlegrounds would remedy that; I don't see very many alternatives. And yes, adding PR to ilvl 159 epics but capping it out at 1600-1700 is just ridiculous. It's like the worst of both worlds, you displease the hardcore Arena players and the crybabies. Might as well have no cap or a cap starting at 1750 all the way through 2400. I think when you saw a Warrior with Ash'kandi, Dark Edge of Insanity, Might of Menethil, or even Rank 14 weapons you used to run in terror. When you saw/see a Warrior with Torch of the Damned or Cat's Edge or Apolyon, you would definitely show respect (before Hyjal/BT became mass market). That feeling of awe at the difficulty of obtaining an item should return in my opinion. Limiting all such items to a strict percentage (or rating) is a good idea but needs to be taken further.