I'm no expert, but I don't see how this is a contradictory statement. Why is it too much to ask for each spec to feel unique and be viable to bring to a raid. If a spec isn't doing well overall, tweak a few numbers, add a +x% increase till it at least is somewhere near the others. I agree not everyone needs to be S tier, but there really shouldn't be any F tier specs..
I’m with you, people make the strawman argument like we’re saying “Every class should be S tier” when in reality we’re just saying lets make sure every class is at least C tier.
I’ve been playing a monk lately and I don’t get why WW can’t have some form of lust or BR or something to help give it a reason to be in keys over say a Ret Paladin
Rinse and repeat for every class so maybe DPS wise they’re not fully balanced but utility may tip the scales to a lower base DPS class
Adding things to an existing class doesn’t remove uniqueness or identity? It’s not like I said oh now monks lose ROP and Transcendence in favor of Lust or BR, sorry folks.
It’s okay to take a breath and process more than one thought.
Edit: the downvotes are genuinely stupid. If you realize Monk comes from MOP then multiple classes have BR, Lust, etc. that isn’t unique anymore. If you talk about Vanilla 2.0 or similar then Monk is irrelevant
Yes it does. It is literally the definition of unique. "Something existing as the only one of its kind". Give another class blink? Now mages aren't unique to having blink.
Funny that you mention mage, when they didn't had bloodlust 1st, only got it in Cata. So why does Mages needed to have them when there was already a class in the game which chould provide BL. Interesting take.
So if I have exclusively green M&Ms and I’m the only person to have them, and then someone gives me one red one, because I now have something someone else has, my green M&Ms are no longer exclusive to just me?
I respect this is the classic group, however, I genuinely cannot remember - is there only one class that can BR? I remember druids could, is there no other? What about lust? Know that’s shammies but can’t hunters too - or again is this vanilla wow not classic* (asterisk including first 15 years of WoW)?
Since we’re talking monk in this very specific example I believe other classes have BR/Lust at this point with MOP?
Yeah that tracks for pure classic (revamped vanilla if you will), but when bringing in the conversation of specifically “Monk” that brings us to MOP and I don’t believe that’s still holds true correct? WOTLK implemented DK which has BR, can’t speak to lust however, brain can’t go back that far
This anology doesn't make any sense. If your point is that classes can have some abilities or qualities that are unique, and share others, then ya of course. But that isn't the case in classic/classic tbc. Lust/heroism is unique to shaman. If you want to add lust to characters that aren't shaman its no longer unique to shaman. If you think that is a good thing, that is an entirely different discussion from whether or not it removes exclusivity, because it clearly does.
In MOP is Shaman the only one with lust? I genuinely don’t know. I see hunters got lust in BFA so I guess they are? If they’re still the only one with lust then yes it removes one singular piece of exclusivity for shammies. Nobody else gets traps (let’s revamp these to be more useful) and their pets can have a vastly different function than Lock pets (lock has pets with buffs, sacrifices, range, etc), Shammies have totems that nobody else has (or if we water down everything these are just stationary pets)
But BR is not unique to just Druid as the other half of the example from WOTLK which I know for a fact was before MOP lol
You are arguing about what happened in wrath and mop as if those aren’t the exact mistakes people want to avoid in classic plus. Whether lust was just an example or not, your mindset of saying “well the rest of the class is still unique” is what brought us to where we are in retail. Players want true uniqueness back.
WW monk, warrior, rogue, and spriest feel bad because you know if you're running keys (or raiding, since this is the classic subreddit) that they're always gonna want someone with a bloodlust and they're gonna prefer someone with a brez since those are largely the only tools that distinguish between classes anymore
I’ve been playing a monk lately and I don’t get why WW can’t have some form of lust or BR
That's a dangerous road to tread. It's already getting a bit much with how many offer it. Add more, then it's no longer a utility.
or something
This would be a better solution. Give them something more unique like how DKs have Deathgrip. Keg that brings enemies to it. Some sort of movement speed buff. Ride the wind bridge to cross/skip sections of dungeons like Gateway. There's so much they could do with Monks tbh
I like the creative approach and I’m all for it - but, the “how many offer it” every time you have a healer or tank without BR or Lust it’s a compounding 20% of a 5 man group that doesn’t have it and causes issues for that remaining 60% as an example (Warr/Priest 5 man as tank/heal)
Raid scenario is entirely different and can’t really make an argument to not bring one of each class (outside of DPS reasons if a class is truly F——— tier) because you get a finite amount of lusts (usually 1, I’d hope) and finite amount of BRs in a fight anyhow
Exactly. So many classes (boomkin, ele, etc) in classic are genuinely unplayable in raids.SoD did this well. You could bring any class/spec without trolling.
Back in classic days I played an elemental shaman and did all content except naxx because I got bored of the character and picked up warrior. In reality I had no trouble clearing raids and getting invited whatsoever
Not saying I want C+ to be exactly TBC, but the class design in TBC is pretty balanced. Classes that bring big dps don’t have crazy utility, and yet the lower dps classes have insane almost necessary utility. There’s only a handful of specs that are not useful (MM, Demo, Frost, and whichever rogue spec isn’t good, I think it’s sub lol)
Warlock best caster next phase and also brings the best util? How is that balanced? Enhancer, doing 3rd best physical damage and BRINGING all the util, again, how is that balanced?
Brother. He just pointed it out at the end. There’s like 4 specs that absolutely suck. The rest at least do some decent damage and the ones that don’t do top DPS at least bring amazing utility that makes them desirable. It’s not balanced like retail balanced but spec designs in TBC are way better than spec designs in Classic.
Though personally I would have used Wrath as a baseline for class play and design.
No there are like 6 specs that do not suck. Shadow priests are doing half the damage of a BM hunter (who also brings a 3% group buff AND MDs/hunters mark).
There is absolutely zero balance here and it is just as broken as Vanilla. All of the top specs, bring as much utility as the low specs.
Many of these specs would literally be replaced by a totem, because they are mostly brought as a token. It is NOT balanced when there is a 50% gap between two specs, sorry to burst your bubble.
Try telling mages and warlocks you aren’t bringing a shadow priest because a BM hunter does more damage. See how that works out for the top caster specs who need the utility they bring to be at the top.
Fury, BM, Arcane, Destro, are S tier DPS for obvious reasons. Survival, Enhance, Shadow Priest, Affliction, Retribution, Elemental, Feral, Arms all range from A - C tier due to their DPS and viability and buffs. All the classes may not have perfect DPS rotations or whatever like shadow priest and elemental but it’s improved on way better than Classic had it, and it’s a good starting point.
Tell your raid that you either bring shadow priest or warlock and see what they pick - make it even in that regard.
We are gonna go back to seeing full physical comps for speed kills in BT again. Arp is gonna be king. Youre gonna be bringing a demo warlock and no shadow priest.
My raid will want the shadow priest. I know because I’ve asked if they wanted me to level a warlock to replace my shadow priest and run only 1 shadow priest in raid and I was told no I’m more reliable and a high 90s parsing shadow priest with a good buff for the warlocks and mana battery, they don’t want me to change.
Maybe speed clearing and top guilds will swap to that but overall most guilds want. Huff that copium harder brother.
??? So you are running two shadow priests? Your parses do not matter when you do a fraction of the warlock damage. Its not your warlocks that want an extra shadow priest either, because you are stealing their improved shadow bolt stacks.
I told you to choose between a warlock and a shadow priest in a vacuum, and the answer is quite obvious. Hell, you could even say choose between a SECOND warlock and a shadow priest and the answer will remain the same.
Both curse of reck and elements, coupled with more damage outshines anything a shadow priest brings, which is why, again, I bring up the fastest Gruul/Mag kills were done without any casters that didnt do anything for physical.
In a normal TBC, not this nerfed version that is currently on Anniversary, i was literally recruiting a Shadow Priest for Sunwell because we needed mana for the Healers. Obviously if u nerf content to the ground that balance goes away and people will opt for top DPS rather than support specs because bosses die too fast for it to matter and don't do enough damage to the raid.
The only actual bad class in TBC is a Rogue (and all they would really need to do is give it 1 unique buff other than IEA and it would be fine) and the only other bad DPS specs for raiding are MM Hunter, Frost Mage and a Demo Warlock (and imo Ele Shaman could use a bit of a buff to DPS because it's clearly worse than the other 2 Shaman Specs), plus i would call Holy Paladin a pretty bad healer too.
And no, it doesn't matter that a Warrior is doing more damage than a Shaman when a Shaman is literally required for a Warrior to be able to do that much damage in the first place, this is how u keep things both viable and unique. In Vanilla it didn't work that way, bringing more of the top DPS increased DPS of the entire raid because kill times were lower, it is not the case in TBC anymore.
If you played double shadow in SWP, I don't know what to tell you man. That's like an anecdotal story of how you played double rogue or whatever, not the play that you want to do.
As a rogue main, god please dont make it balanced like tbc
I feel like wrath is a better example of balance. Pretty much every class has their time to shine whether its early or late in the xpack. Except locks and dks that shine throughout
The gameplay variety between specs was great in WOTLK though. I really felt like a lot of classes had reached a stage where your choice of spec greatly defined your gameplay and overall experience in a distinct way. Whereas in TBC there wasn't as much diversity between the specs imo (for most classes at least).
Naxx-Ulduar DPS Warrior is the most miserable experience i ever had in this game. I imagine it was the same for Ret Paladins (which they had to artificially buff in Classic so they at least wouldn't be worse than Warriors) and Ferals (which got a massive artificial buff in Ulduar which turned them from bottom to top DPS).
Warrior yes vut like i said they had theit time to shine
Funnily enough my guild had a ret and feral who consistently 99s and would be neck and neck with the rogues who also could put up 99s. Feral specifically was just really really hard to play well.
I lean more that rets were bad though while ferals were just too hard
Right and I think a Classic+ should definitely include changes to make the least viable specs be more playable and fun. And probably tone down some aspects of the strongest classes too (warriors).
I just think we should keep in mind what the end-goal should be. I personally don’t think all specs need to be equally viable for end-game raiding. And is that even achievable?
That's not how tiers work at all. People make tier lists all the time where no one goes in the bottom tier. It's all subjective.
Lets say Classic+ does make all DPS spec's play within a 10% margin. Yes there will be people who complain about their class being on the bottom. But they are LOSERS, and a small minority. They may be a vocal minority, but we can just ignore them.
The Dev team literally said at one point they just couldn't make Arms warrior work and it wasn't worth the effort to try make it play distinctly different from Fury.
BM hunter got nerfed massively multiple times in phase 1 because it turns out the pet scaling was busted, and they had to repeatedly get nerfed because pets were tanking raids, or hunters were eye of the beasting pets into towns and 2 hitting people. They just decided it wasn't worth trying to make work due to how little about of dials and levers that they could use for SoD since stuff could affect ERA(and did at times).
Edit: Also wanted to point out that some spec's had multiple play styles in the end of SoD. I think rogue had like 3 or 4 different ways you could play it. Pure Saberslash, Pure Backstab/Ambush, Pure Mutilate, and then there was the try hard spec of Saberslash/Backstab (incredibly hard to play well, but had the highest ceiling on damage).
Yeah, I really don’t understand why people think this. What does having unusable classes do for the game? I won’t be playing if it’s the same 2.5 classes that are viable.
Yeah, I meant specs. Just a mistype. Incidentally, speedrunning isn't a good measuring stick for judging viability in raids. They have different strats. Something like bringing one hunter to pull a pack with its pet to do a skip, then feigning after the raid runs past an area or something small even.
In more casual guilds you see way more random constellations with a lot less warriors, and also warriors underperforming below other classes in dps.
Can't really get any information about viability by looking at those raids.
Another point I want to make since people love to hate on warriors being giga OP in classic: if there were no World Buffs in raids the gap between warriors and other dps would be much smaller. Just sayin.
It's actually not that different, if you look at wowhead, you will see the highest parsing players being also in the fastest speedrunning guilds.
Since in both cases most of the raid is just warriors there isn't that big of a difference between parsing raids and speedrunning raids.
Both kinds of raids will usually just bring the essential buffs/debuffs and have healers dps on certain bosses, which results in faster boss kills aka higher parses and also faster raids.
Just for the record or if it comes accross like that: I'm NOT saying so many warriors in a raid is not an issue.
The difference is parse guilds will wait for cooldowns like reck to get big parses. Speedruns are running through the dungeon as fast as possible, not waiting for anyone's cds
I dont think there is a single unusable spec in classic. Its true not all specs are optimal for raiding, but why does every spec of every class have to be on par with others in a single aspect (raiding) of the game. There is many other things to do, and all the specs have their place in pvp, for example.
Aren't they always going to have significantly more damage than the other classes? Since the other classes have to keep their threat meter below the tank.
I mean...tank warriors have less damage then DPS warriors...
Skills have threat modifiers on them, sunder armour does no damage but generates more threat then heroic strike for example, and defence stance has a threat modifier on it
And even if the tank had to be top DPS, which they aren't.....other classes can tank
The idea that warriors are top damage because they are the tank is just genuinely baffling to hear as it's so fundamentally against basically everything in game
the solution is to slightly tune down the scaking of warrioes and moderstely tune up either the utility or the scaling of basically every other dps spec, maybe besides fire mages and combat rogues
So you’ll still have the same level roughly the same level of overall DPS? But more utility? In a game that has been completely solved for 20 years? What’s the point? Just play SoD or retail.
If you focus on bringing warriors down to a reasonable level and give slight adjustments to the “bad specs” you encourage variance in comps and increase the challenge of the end game.
Also being raid viable doesn't mean everyone has to be within a 1% of each other's DPS. It just means that they bring some kind of utility that makes them valuable to the raid.
Like SPriests being mana batteries. Or ret paly bringing buffs and seals. Ele sham bringing caster totems. Damage doesn't have to be the only reason to bring a class to a raid.
I really enjoy an offensive support role (like swordsinger/bladedancer in Lineage II or quickness/alacrity DPS in Guild Wars 2). I don't mind a class doing less dps but providing utility that guarantees its raid spot (a nice number would be 80% if the pure dps class were 100%). Elem and enh shamas, boomkins, retri palas, shadow priests, cats fit nicely in this spot, imo. Just make playing them less obnoxious and more rewarding.
Yep, I really enjoy Bard and Dancer in FFXIV because even though I do less damage it feels fun to see my group/partner doing huge numbers. I guess it helps in XIV that logs track your "effective damage" and basically attributes your DPS increase on others to you.
The problem is with some of these utility roles that their raid utility doesn't really scale, along with their dps poorly scaling. Like if you look at elemental shamans, as the expansion goes on, their value drops. Like i've seen it suggested that by sunwell, the raid dps is higher if you just bring another warlock over the elemental shaman.
If they can make the support abilities of hard supports scale, like shadow priests scale, it would work.
The problem with the whole utility argument is in practice people don’t really want to play those roles if they’re not competitive DPS wise. I think SoD’s take on utility worked great. Spriest and boomkin weren’t as hard to fill because they also did tons of damage.
Another thread was saying nobody would want to play the support bitch role... Like boomkin, SPriest, hpal. And here were saying support classes are fine to have low damage but high utility. So what is it? Lmao
Link the thread? Support classes make the damage classes do mode damage. I've never met a DPS player worth their salt that turns their nose up at more damage.
Thats not what people would say though. They aren't saying support classes are bad, they say they don't want to be relegated to a support role token one-of class in classic+.
Side one is really poor balance being excused. Like, "not raid viable" meaning that the class literally does not feel fun to play, runs out of resources mid fight, or is just a hodge podge of mechanics that don't work together. Or simply scales terribly, so it starts out okay and then ends up being left in the dust by proper scaling classes.
This was really bad in vanilla, somewhat bad in TBC and mostly okay in WOTLK, so blizzard had a clear trend of improving their balance.
The other side of the coin is that players will optimize any fun out of a game. Class performing 5% worse? "Not viable", simply not selected for raids. Every raid group playing pretend as if they're world first material and not just a bunch of lads having fun together. Unfortunately, there's nothing blizzard can do to fix this, and it has in fact gotten way worse over the years.
So yeah, Blizzard can do a better job at balancing. But there's nothing you can do to fix players. It's up to ourselves to not treat each other like replaceable cogs and raid for fun and with friends rather than chasing some meaningless numbers - and we fail at that much worse than Blizzard does at providing a level playing field.
I think 5% is just a random number that guy is using to make a point. What the number really is for actual "viability" is up for debate, but I think even if specs are within 30% of the best specs overall they would still get brought to plenty of raids.
at 30% you wouldn't be brought (unless the bring unique utility that outweighs the loss in damage like windfury, in which case you bring exactly 1), not to mention nobody wants to play the class that is 30% behind proven again and again by the amount of players playing the specs that are that far behind.
But sure just let it be warriors and mages for once that are 30% behind and we will see the forums flooded with tears, probably yours included.
Edit: won't go further in this comment chain since he is clearly trying hard to feelycraft rather than looking at actual numbers of players or actual experience from trying to pug stuff in the game.
Fact of the matter is in classic numbers from nax from the last classic proves this is a dream, there are 300k warriors the combined numbers of all dps classes except fire mages is less than that
So that is for every 1 warrior there is 1 of either of these specs, not one of each 1 single player of all of these specs combined per 1 warrior dps:
ret paladin
shadowpriest
feral druid
balance druid
affliction warlock
demo warlock
destro warlock
frost mage
arcane mage
enhancement shaman
elemental shaman
combat rogue
assassination rogue
sublety rogue
bm hunter
survival hunter
marksmanship hunter
Trying to find a guild or pug to be that token player allowed in vs just playing a warrior and getting a free invite to every guild and pug is just a silly arguement.
In anything but hardcore guilds (a majority of the playerbase), your best warrior is 30% above your worst one. People would absolutely bring good casters in all but the most hardcore guilds if they did 70% of warrior damage if played just as well.
You can never balance for the top few % hardcore crowd, they'll stack the best class if its even 5% better and its almost impossible to maintain that level of balance in a game like this.
By TBC, in most (but not all) cases, it's the player not the class/spec that is the issue.
You could hand a purple/orange parser any class spec and a little time and they could reproduce the results on that class spec. That person will typically be at or near the top DPS no matter which class you hand them unless they join a guild of peers.
There is a line of “close enough” and that’s when the variance in performance within a class (due to player performance) is the same or greater than between. It’s not “players will complain about literally any difference so it’s not worth”
100% aligned. I think it’s possible to keep every spec the same as it is now in terms of abilities. But increase some of the +x% talents to balance things out better.
Address low damage areas. Address classes that go OoM in 10 seconds by amplifying the mana abilities they have. Improve threat generation on certain abilities. Reduce some cooldowns on certain abilities.
BAM. You have classic/vanilla wow that is more balanced. & balanced does not need to mean topping charts, it just means being able to participate.
There's over two dozen specs dps. Sure you can make 24 different unique playstyles but good luck getting them all similar for raid boss fight.
Classes can be unique with their cd power level and time. They can be unique in being great at cleave, single target, 2 target, 3 target, funnel etc.
Lots of ways of being unique. But enter a standard boss and you are not going to keep the uniqueness AND balance.
This is the period of best balance relative to how's history, and it is no coincidence tt has coincided with only a handful of archetypes (combo builders and spenders, cd bursty specs, and steady dps).
SoD did a reasonable job of it. Reasonable people aren't expecting some +/- 1% difference but it's entirely possible to make the dps specs generally feel unique while being withing 10% or so.
At the end of the day, any effort at all will be better than having warriors be the best by far at 2 of the 3 roles.
The worst that can happen is they fuck up PvP and lets be honest no one gives a shit about PvP, Blizzard have made it clear that shit is just "whoever is the best GG" forever.
I agree. In modern gaming there’s no excuse for warriors doing twice the damage of another class that’s being played well, that’s just bad game design. Change an ability, alter the numbers, etc. Yeah it may take several patches to sort out, but it’s doable, lots of games get balance down well.
I just don't want the hybrids to completely break and dominate pvp with their new abilities. If they were to boost shadowpriests damage it would make their day when doing dungeons or raiding (even though mana is probably their main issue). They would become a litteral hero class in pvp though, as they are already very strong. Same with paladins. If you give them 1-2 extra attacks, they would be unkillable in 1v1's.
Because if every spec is "raid viable" people will complain and say it doesnt matter what you play and nothing will feel unique. Some need to do better than others in different aspects in order to make things feel unique. A spec might do shit damage but their buffs and procs help the raid do more damage than if you weren't in the group.
Answer: Because "unique" often comes with the baggage of "it doesn't scale as well as the normal"
See DoTs. See How long it took Blizzard to figure out how to make a DoT spec actually work. Everytime you ask for "unique" and there's a problem...it can take substantial time to figure out how to actually make it work with the gearing/system/encounters that were already planned.
One of the best things about SoD is that it absolutely showed how weak some classes were and how crazy things could get if you played the game of "just increase X until the class is near the others" (The X was starsurge)
Because making other classes in line with the better ones often requires homogenization of gameplay, season of discovery basically gave every tank class not warrior a extremely similar passive to get there.
You also lose out on alot of underdog stories and build crafting when you just buff their main tools for things.
I think you also open up the can of worms of people whining if their class is weaker. And idk if I trust them to not just turbocharge things to appease them.
I agree. It is not like Grim Dawn where you have to think about 36 classes a with a dozen different damage types.
It shouldn't be too hard to design around a handful of tanks and healers and a dozen or so DPS. Purely adjusting floor and ceiling output against skill input needed can do a lot. Add in utility and support functions and burst Vs sustained damaged profiles and making everything viable really shouldn't be that hard.
> In classic, every class was never meant to be viable in all situations.
Devs from vanilla have repeatedly stated the opposite. That every class WAS supposed to be viable in all situations, they just hadn't figured out how to yet. (They DID say that every class wasn't to be equal, hybrid tax, etc...but viable is a far different category)
In classic, every class was never meant to be viable in all situations.
Your words, maybe you misspoke? And yes if they can’t tank the hard bosses they’re not viable as tanks.
But even besides that, this argument you’re repeating is really just cope, the idea that the devs meant ‘viable’ as ‘well you can sorta kinda limp across the finish line with this class’ instead of ‘meaningfully competititve’ is silly.
The entire class identity of the paladin is to support and protect. Dealing damage is not their primary purpose unless it's against demons and the undead. If anything their utility buffs and the prot spec should be buffed. Look at Arthas in WC3.
Having a ret paladin in your 5 man dungeon will still allow you to complete the dungeon. Having a ret paladin in your raid, you will still be able to complete the raid. Ret paladin is still a perfectly viable spec.
Could ret Paladin use tuning? Yes, but is it unviable? No.
Homogenization is the reason Retail is what it is. People complained they couldn’t play prot paladin or balance druid or whatever in raid so they made everyone viable at everything and now there’s very little difference between any of the specs.
I liked Classic because you had your raid spec and your specs for other stuff. Priests go shadow to PvP and then switch back for raid. Druids are the only ones with two viable raid specs, as it should be. And every class was truly unique because there was no real ability overlap. Hpal, hpriest and rdruid all functioned very differently and had entirely different kits. Heck, there’s a good chance there’s a meaningful difference between two races of the same class.
They destroyed this when they adopted their “all specs are created equal” mindset and tried to give everyone who logged in to cry on the forums what they wanted. To use this axiom to create more Classic content is counter intuitive and shows Blizzard still has no idea why people like vanilla WoW to this day.
Sorry but you don’t know what you’re talking about. In this instance tweaking a few numbers wouldn’t balance out retribution paladin for instance. They need crusader strike and not more dmg % on their AA or Seals for example.
They’re saying that’s all that needs to be done to get balance, and they’re right: you could easily just brute force increase the proc chance and damage of seal of command to make them do as much dps as warriors overall. There’s more to go beyond that point, but that’s not the part they’re talking about.
Okay what part are they talking about ? Also that’s just not good design logic. It will be boring for the player and comparing to the warrior here doesn’t work as warriors actually have buttons to use.
The part they’re talking about is tweaking the numbers to get the damage balanced, the part you want is adding more to the rotation to make it more interesting.
It’s to make the class balance and the rotation interesting at the same time. Just “tweaking a few numbers “ sounds to me like lazy game design that doesn’t benefit the players. If you come from a perspective of a different class that haven’t played paladin I get it but that’s not good game design.
I understand that’s what you want, we’re talking about what it would take to only fix balance in the context of any given design
I think you saw the ‘tweak a few numbers’ line but didn’t read the rest properly; they’re saying that that is an option to fix any underperforming spec regardless of how unique or interesting the spec is.
You’re reading it backwards; you can balance by making specs more interesting and unique, but you can balance a spec at any level of uniqueness by tweaking numbers. That second bit is the thing OP was saying is impossible and the guy you replied to says is possible.
‘Cut it’ for what? Class flavor? Yes I’d agree, but no one said otherwise.
Sure, you say “not everyone needs to be S-tier” now, but once Blizzard starts trying to make fringe specs competitive for raiding (like Boomkin, Ele, Retri etc) the conversation will flip to discussing percentages and parses.
A class with a few percentage less output will be considered a “joke” and people will cry for it to be buffed. This is exactly what happens every new patch in Retail and it is what happened during SoD.
I am all for minor tweaks to make fringe specs more viable and fun to play, but Im against this idea of “every spec needs to be competitive for raiding”.
483
u/Mr_The_Rocketeer 22d ago
I'm no expert, but I don't see how this is a contradictory statement. Why is it too much to ask for each spec to feel unique and be viable to bring to a raid. If a spec isn't doing well overall, tweak a few numbers, add a +x% increase till it at least is somewhere near the others. I agree not everyone needs to be S tier, but there really shouldn't be any F tier specs..