I actually really like the mechanic where Archavon drops actual items and not tokens - making it feel like you really got "lucky" if you come out with something, not that it's a guaranteed thing. To me, Archavon is like spinning a bonus wheel every week, and if you come out with something, great. It would be nice to see him adjusted to not drop items that are unusable by any member of the raid, though.

However, I do agree with you about how this system unfairly penalizes hybrids, and something should probably be done about that. If the only solution is to move to tokens, I won't cry too much, but it will take away a bit of "unique" flavor.

If people don't deserve the gear that he drops for killing him, then he shouldn't be dropping it in the first place. Either killing Archavon-25 is worth a piece of Valorous/Deadly, or it's not - and if it's not, he should be dropping Heroes'/Hateful in 25, too. The fact that some classes are, by virtue of what color their name is in the raid window, up to 3 times more likely to get the gear they're angling for is the bigger issue in my mind, though.

Regarding the "I got lucky" factor: The percent droprates on Archavon are so low for most pieces of hybrid gear that they pass straight through fun and into frustrating. For me, at least, it hardly feels worth it to try and run the boss for a piece of gear that literally has the same droprate as a Thunderfury binding.

Edit: Maths

I couldn't disagree more. I love the way Archavon is a genuine roll of the dice each week for an instant great item. The odds are way against you, but the instance wasnt intended to be a 'fair' way of allowing you free, super easy access to some of the best items. The instance is fun, short, easily puggable and if you got lucky you might end up with a great drop. If you don't like the design and find it frustrating, just don't go to the instance.

I suppose the main problem I have with the boss is how differently the odds are stacked, depending on class. Having his droprates so small is a design decision, but having some classes (rogues, mages, hunters) literally three times more likely to get their set drops than others (druids, shamans) seems like bad design.

Indeed, well said. It shouldn't be based on your use of the character selection screen as to how likely you are to actually get something from those encounters. Blizzard changed to a token system precisely because the system was too frustrating, and they've acknowledged that it was an archaic system more suited to 40 players where someone was likely to take it anyway. I don't think anyone dislikes the 'odds being against you', I think it's more to do you being much less-likely to find the odds in your favour than the player stood next to you.

Regarding the mana regeneration changes, with regards to healing I like the idea of reducing overall regen - I shouldn't be able to keep CoH on cooldown purely to proc SoL to aid with spike healing if I want to - however I find the OOFSR regen model is actually rather enjoyable, and reducing everything to burst regen is quite simplistic, and completely RNG proc based, instead of depending on skill and clever use of abilities. For example using Renew/ProM/Shield after a big heal to set up a tick or two of oofsr regen, or allow yourself to channel Hymn of Hope - actually requires a bit of awareness and knowledge of what to expect next. I'm unsure as to how this change means you won't be spam cancelcasting your largest heal instead, effectively reducing the fun involved with learning to maximise playing a Priest? Looking at WWS, changing the use of Serendipity effectively means I'm losing a shade over 68% of what I gain from Replenishment over the course of a full Naxx farm clear, having PoH introduced unlocks a potential huge mana sink which was largely situational before, too. In short, I'd rather keep the interesting regen model while losing mana elsewhere without homogenizing healers, if I wanted high throughput I'd have played a Paladin, however I happened to want flexibility and an interesting style of play (which includes regen). Perhaps part of the problem right now is that if you want to make the game "hard" for the more serious gamers with excellent understanding of the game, then the limiting factor will always come down to the GCD.

It certainly seems like it has the potential to warp heroics. Whether they're tuned around having it or not, it's going to be a big enough difference to feel, and so a whole lot of people are going to refuse to enter a heroic at all unless someone in the group brings Replenishment.

This wouldn't be so bad, actually, if every non-hybrid class had at least one spec that offered it. Hunters, mages, and warlocks do, but rogues do not. Honestly, I'd like to see it taken away from priests and given to rogues. That way we can define a fourth role, "mana battery", and declare that every class in the game is now at least a two-role hybrid.

What does that accomplish other than make the term 'hybrid' more meaningless than it already is?

Manly said it best on the mage forums. If we assumed to always have Replenishment in a group scenario, then why wouldn't they make it a base fact like they did with blessing of salvation.

In TBC, everything was balanced around having Salv. Rather than give salv to everyone, it got 'baked in' so the ability ceased to exist and everyone had the effect of it. Rather than continue to spread replnishment to every class, why not simply provide the replenishment regen to all mana users at all times?

Also a lot of "thankless buffer" talents have to be introduced. Retadin, Spriest, and SurvHunt all get personal benefits from their Replenish effects. If you grant Warlocks and Mages Replenish, there has to be a good reason for them to spec it. If it's a DPS loss for those classes - no one will willingly spec into Replenish, even though it's available.

So they're either tacking Replenish free onto "mandatory" talents for at least one spec in each class, or making a talent no one wants.

This just more strongly argues into Manly's idea to make it baseline for everyone.

Archavon is a lottery. Buy a ticket for a small chance winning of the jackpot. Going there with serious intents of gearing up is stupid. If you need a certain piece of gear get it the normal way.

I like it because it brings back fond memories of classic looting. Mind you, I'm glad that the classic loot distribution is gone, but to have a bonus boss in the game which brings it back is fun. And besides, if it wasn't as random as it is then he wouldn't drop what he drops now.

Archavon lottery loot for a pve piece isn't an issue. He's about as difficult as no-drake sarth. The loot table is so large that odds are you won't get anything you really want, no biggie. The problem in my mind comes from the pvp-side. Winning a pvp piece not only gets you the item, but saves you 2.2k arena points a non-trivial sum for most people. My GM has gotten all three of his deadly pieces from it, meaning he's gotten a bonus ~5-6K points just from being lucky. That runs completely counter to the pvp-design as I understand it. If arch wasn't dropping the top-tier of the pvp stuff it'd be fine to have it be totally chancey, but I dislike being taxed because Archavon doesn't like me.

I have to chime in with saying I really like how Archavon is a weekly lottery. Free badges, free gold, and a really low chance a good item you may not otherwise have been able to get. If they add a third Archavon for Tier 9, I still see no problem with someone in blues/greens winning a piece of Tier 9. Basically like say a minimum-wage worker winning a Porsche in a contest or something.

As for the PvP gear, I'm not a serious PvPer, so I personally like having won 2 pieces of deadly gear from him, but I can see how it would be frustrating for a serious PvPer.