em seu navegador.
5.2 PTR: Single-Player Loot-Grabbing Scenario, Ghostcrawler on PvP
04/2/2013 em 11:06
We've got a more current preview of this scenario
, now with harmful NPCs and traps present!
5.2 Single-Player Loot-Grabbing Scenario
On Blizzard's recent
Patch 5.2 Preview
page, they describe a "single-player loot-grabbing scenario," otherwise known as the
. This was recently viewable in a rough state on the PTR, and while we queued up and tested it out, we weren't quite sure what its purpose was until Blizzard's announcement!
It appears that
Cidadela do Rei Trovão
is the zone for the single-player scenario and the steps are as follows:
Stage 1 – Speak to Taoshi
You will only have a limited amount of time to gather as much treasure as you can. Speak to Taoshi when you're ready to begin.
Final Stage – Reach the Exit
Grab as much treasure as you can and reach the exit before the timer expires.
To access the
, your server must have unlocked part of the
Ilha do Trovão
through completing server-wide
from dailies. There are other features that are unlocked at different phases, such as the
allowing you to craft Blacksmithing weapons with interesting models (
When we tested out the scenario, it was a work in progress as no hostile mobs were present, but all the treasure chests were filled with loot and the levers needed to activate all the doors worked. The scenario is a series of rooms with chests scattered around--some easy to reach, some annoying. With hostile mobs present, it's easy to see how players would have to plan out a careful route to maximize looting chests while dodging and fighting monsters. In addition, each room is opened by a lever, some of which are far away from their doors.
We found that the chests contained the following items:
Espírito da Harmonia
Antigo Amuleto de Boa Sorte
(remember, this will only work on Tier 14 bosses in 5.2),
Pedra Ritual de Shan'ze
(used to summon rare bosses), and gold.
Remember, this scenario still needs some work and the mechanics or loot tables could change before 5.2!
There is a related achievement:
Nos salões do Rei Trovão
. Open 10 Golden Chests during one run of the Mogu Treasure Vault.
Ghostcrawler on Class Balance
With Season 13 Weapons and Armor available on the PTR now, it makes sense that Ghostcrawler devoted much of the last few days to discussing 5.2 PvP Balance.
Click the cut to read all of his posts, organized by class!
I have to agree with an earlier post about how this game should be about bringing out a good product and making it a good game. It seems more and more the justification for changes (or not making changes in this case) is the number of subs that will be lost.
This is pretty off-topic, but I'll address it anyway. Making good games is about keeping players engaged, about their having fun, their being happy.
Any game designer worth their salt wants players to love their game. That's why you choose this business. Yes, we all need to put bread on the table at the end of the day, but there are hundreds of careers that can deliver on that. We chose this one because we like games.
Now WoW is blessed with a whole lot of players. Unsurprisingly, those players like different things. The forum community is very self-selecting and generally a lot more hardcore than it realizes. You guys are really important to us. You care about the game deeply. You help us improve it just because you want it to be better. There's even a business angle - you evangelize the game to others. Everyone wins.
But making a change to the game - any kind of change, even a great change - carries with it a certain amount of risk. I can almost guarantee that someone out there will hate any change we make. If enough players dislike a change, then there is a chunk of the community that is unhappy. Sometimes we make tough decisions that are unpopular at the time, usually because we think the long term benefits are worth it and players may just not fully appreciate those in the short term. But overall, we want players to be happy. It's not a vote or a poll or anything and we're not about to turn over steering the ship to the community. But keeping players happy matters.
Consider the opposite: what kind of responses do you think we'd be seeing if I posted things like "We don't care if you like it or not, we're making this change," or "We don't care how many players we alienate - this is the way it's going to be." That would be a terrible way to keep players happy. So all I'm asking is don't beat us up for caring about the impact that our decisions make on the whole player base, not just the minority who post.
- We are reverting
having shared diminishing returns with other forms of crowd control. While we are keeping the cooldown of
cast by Feral druids in order to make
CC less dominant, we are lowering the cooldown to 20 sec from 30 sec.
If you somehow feel the energy cost is fair (impossibru :p), what if we could
any target? Rather than only our combo target? Kinda of like having Redirect built into
? Or convert
into a bleed, so it ignores armor and scales with Mastery? Or make it so does extra damage if the target is immune to stuns?
The redirect is part of what we're trying to get away from with the PS +
. It just feels like you can't counter or even predict it. We like trying to boost
as well because it gives druids another type of CC, but one that does take some build up and has a real cost. That's the same kind of gameplay I'm trying to advocate above: full of counters.
The problem with Feral movement speed is that they could get up to 215% speed or something like that. Yet there is no good way in the game to explain what stacks with what, so you'd have to try out mixing and matching boot enchants with
or whatever and figure out what worked. It was recreating the whole crazy CC DR matrix problem, which is hardly a design worthy of emulation.
you may think you have fixed it - but you have not. Only 3 days ago on life I was pursuing a hunter - I don't have any speed bonus except the +25% from cat - my nose was almost touching his back and I still got "out of range" errors.
The hitbox of a cat has the same hitbox as a gnome or a tauren. The nose of the model doesn't matter - it comes from the center of the model. What you're probably seeing is what all melee deal with, particularly when moving very quickly (+25% counts) and no snares. The two clients just often disagree about the position of you and your target.
That said, we are likely to make the change I mentioned yesterday about reverting the PvP set bonus and having it not stack with
The problem is the
talent. It always has been. But now you're forcing feral PvP into a catch 22 situation. We're either forced to take
just to stop the out of range errors when trying to use abilities, and lose our gap closer.. or we get inundated with out of range errors when trying to do anything. You know the feral hit box is still out of whack... and the feral speed bonus on the PvP set was to compensate for this.
We fixed the Feral hit box some time ago. Different races and models once had different combat reaches. It has all been normalized at least since Cataclysm.
However, to address your main concern, a different option would be to prevent
and the PvP set bonus from stacking.
would just remain a dead talent at least among knowledgeable PvP players.
- We are reverting the removal of
- now also lowers the stun duration of
by 1 sec in addition to taking
off the GCD.
has a 1 sec longer duration. So a mage with the item=45740] will see no change, but a mage without the glyph will have a slightly better
- now also lowers the stun duration of
by 1 sec in addition to taking
off the GCD.
instant cast, but won't make it arm instantly.
- PvP 2pc bonus - the reduction in cooldown on
is now only applied if you successfully use
to interrupt (not silence) a target.
Anel da Paz
has been adjusted. It now forms a sanctuary around the friendly target, causing enemies within 8 yards to be disarmed and causes enemies who cast a harmful spell to be silenced for 3 sec. Moving out of the ring does not remove the silence, but it won't trigger again. The duration of
Anel da Paz
is 8 sec.
- duration is now 4 sec from the front / 6 sec from the back (down from 4 / 8).
- We agree that Retribution does not offer enough benefits to an Arena or Battleground team beyond just taking a Holy paladin. We are going to try a change where
Bênção do Sacrifício
also dispels all harmful magic effects on the target for Ret only.
If you played a Holy paladin and found your
had a longer cooldown, and found Word of Glory had been replaced with (making this up) "Phrase of Glory" with a 2.5 sec cast time, and found that
Proficiência em Auras
no longer prevented player silences, you might find yourself a little disoriented. Those are the kinds of changes we think would be necessary to allow interrupts to sufficiently serve as a counter to healing at this point in time.
While it might seem impossible to the forum-posting contingent of our player base, we lose more players to frustration at constant class design changes than we do to perceived balance problems. We have to keep that in mind when considering any changes, even those that are ultimately better for the game in the long run.
- We knew haste would be attractive to Protection when we gave them
, which only Retribution had previously. That's why we gave them
. Even if you have a tanking set with no haste, there are haste buffs in the game. We wanted all the tanks to benefit somewhat from what were traditionally DPS stats, since part of the active mitigation design was to make tanks care more about hitting things with sword (and claws). It only gets to be a problem, as I said previously, if dodge and parry (which are going to be on some gear) are perceived as pointless. (They aren't pointless, but that's really beside the point at this stage.) We aren't going to reitemize every plate piece in the game to remove dodge and parry. We also don't want to nerf haste for paladins, because it is fun, and for the most part working as intended. We don't have a solution yet that we're willing to share, but that's the intent. I state all this, because I feel like this already long thread has become a bit too dominated by this one topic in the past few pages.
Are you on some sort of cheap drug when you make choices. Tanks care about these things dodge parry block armor HP. Thats all that should matter. It has always been this way in every game ever made. It is the D & D way and the correct way. When you take this focus away you lose your ability to be a lead developer and deserve to be removed from the team.
The answer to your first question is yes. My answer to the rest is: have you seen all of the paladins begging us not to change the way haste works for them because it is both useful and fun? Are they all wrong too? Nah, never mind, don't answer that.
Eye for an eye baseline would be kinda cool, but it'll have to be designed really well because I don't want it breaking CCs lol. I would probably rather have something else if I had to choose though.
Something we hear a lot from Retribution is they want a little more “retribution” back in their kit. We don’t think passive and/or random reflection like Eye for an Eye or Retribution Aura were super interesting mechanics but we understand the attraction of the idea in general and we’ll consider something longer term.
Yep. Frost is a lot better than Ret. I'm not trying to suggest otherwise. I just think that those saying the Sac change isn't potent are wrong. It's a huge buff to Ret utility.
Yeah, we agree. It's not "Ret mandatory on every 3s team" good, but I think you can understand why we wouldn't want that.
We are considering some other buffs to Ret still. We don't know yet if we will do any or all of these (they are emphatically not promises) but the kind of thing we are considering:
-- no longer requires Seal of Insight. You can have any Seal or none active, which puts the glyph in Ret's hands.
-- damage reduction triggered by Exorcism (or both) instead. That way you aren't choosing TV over a heal.
Martelo da Luz
-- also snares targets it damages while in range. This one potentially buffs Holy too, but we're not sure that many Holy paladins would give up Prism to take it.
We were trying to solve a very specific problem here, where a paladin wants to join an Arena team, and the team says "Can't you just go Holy, because you won't lose anything?" or the paladin looking for an RBG team who hears "We need a rogue and a DK, but don't have room for a Ret paladin." We were specifically looking for a modest buff to group utility that was Ret specific.
On survivability specifically, I feel like we're hearing that DKs are squishy and paladins are squishy and shaman are squishy, which makes me think that once
for warriors isn't overpowered that all melee might feel about the same.
- no longer makes you untargetable. Movement protection increased to 5 sec (from 3 sec).
- now belongs to the Shadow school, meaning it can get locked out.
- We are expanding the Shadow healing nerf to most of the priest healing toolkit. This means Holy and Discipline will have a passive that increases all of their healing by 25% as do most other healing classes. Holy and Discipline should see no change as a result, but Shadow's heals will be weaker. Remember that this will be partially offset relative to 5.1 because Shadow does get some healing benefit from PvP Power. (This note replaces earlier notes about
being nerfed for Shadow).
just curious, what are you looking at that makes you think shadow priests are OP in pvp? It seems that we get more nerfs based on a projection of what you might think is the case, then classes that were/are OP. What about shadow makes you think it's over powered? I still feel like I get focused every game I play, and you nerfing my escape tool kit, when I don't ever see how priests had superior escapes.
There’s always an element of that in PvP. For PvE, we have a really good idea of how much damage everyone can do in every situation. That’s harder to generate for PvP and not even super relevant. We do look at who is winning a lot in PvP. We do it a lot ourselves to try and understand why. We also try to pay a lot of attention to player feedback, especially those skilled PvP players whose opinions we respect, but also the guy just doing pickup BGs who still deserves to have fun. In all of those cases, the names that keep coming up are Frost, Arms, Shadow and maybe BM.
Frost and Arms are taking some big nerfs. BM has a couple of little ones. With Shadow, I’ve tried to be honest that we’re not exactly sure of the right thing to hit. There isn’t anything there like
Onda de Choque
that feels totally broken. It’s a lot of little things that add up: damage, healing, utility, survivability. Utility we really don't want to hit and damage isn't too high in PvE. At the moment, we've nerfed burst a little, healing a little, and made some of the survivability mechanics less potent. We'll see how that feels.
Perhaps there is a much simpler solution (a numbers tweak rather than a mechanics tweak)?
I feel like we’d have to nerf
dramatically to have the same effect. The
change was mostly so priests could go back to using it at the right moment and not just on cooldown because it was a throughput increase. Those are the two major changes that weren’t numbers tweaks.
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
mana cost (this is gonna have to happen one way or another to make it viable), and make it so that a priest can't have more than 3 - 4 active
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
This suggestion (limit 3 or whatever) has come up a few times, and possibly for other traditionally-hard-to-balance spells like
. We are unlikely to make any of these changes for 5.2 so it’s probably beyond the scope of discussion in this thread, but we wouldn’t mind hearing more feedback on the idea over the long term. I personally worry that it might feel like a lot to have to track, which makes mods more mandatory, etc.
formula is slightly off - right now the metagem critical effect (1.03) is only being multiplied in on the expected aegis size on crits not on the entire crit heal. This is causing a slight decrease in the size of
You are correct. Fixed.
what the (insert explicit here) are you thinking nerfing shadow priests this hard? you do realize it all but benches them in pve right? they needed a buff in pve as it stands now, and your nerfing them??? seriously?
How does nerfing
bench Shadow in PvE? We avoided utility nerfs that would risk hurting them in PvE, as I mentioned, such as targeting
Símbolo de Esperança
Dissipação em Massa
GC, it is obvious that the nerf to
is a loss on dps even if you are just standing and doing damage.
This is a legit PvE nerf, but a very, very small one and as I said, we haven't made any PvE numbers adjustments to anyone yet. This one is easy to fix without PvP risk and it makes a glyph less mandatory for its DPS benefits.
If they catch your cast time spells, which only melee really seem to bother doing these days, then you'll be unable to cast
until your shadow school is available again. But yes, if a mage decided to wait for you to cast a VT and counterspell that, instead of using a blanket silence on you, then they could prevent
Yes. I predict the
nerf won't really be felt that much, especially among lower ratings.
Was the damage buff it provided too strong? In almost the exact same gear I'm using, I was doing ~67k sustained single target dps. Seemed fine, provided that I had 0 mobility while doing that.
Was the rotation being used to maximize it's effect not what you envisioned? I like how it changed our rotation without actually changing it. We were just hitting DP more frequently.
If you are talking about the version of Insanity where you just use
at one orb all the time, we thought that undermined the entire rotation. It didn't just change it, it made it so you didn't need to build up orbs any longer.
Not really sure what this mean or how this really affect gameplay nor why this change now tbh... mind to explain?
makes the cast instant instead of 2 sec (reduced by haste). This means the ring will appear immediately if
'd, but it won't freeze immediately. After 2 sec (again reduced by haste) the freeze happens.
: 2 sec cast, 2 sec arming time
: 0 sec cast, 0 sec arming time
: 0 sec cast, 2 sec arming time
I can see that 99% of this entire thread is related to PvP, but any chance of some feedback from GC on how he can think a 40-50% nerf to Disc AoE heals is a fair thing, given that at the absolute most we top the meters by 20%. Sure we needed a nerf, but an execution?
It seems like a lot more than 20% to us. In any case, you still have
Prece de Cura
, just not guaranteed any more. You can force
. You can toss out
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
on some folks.* You can also still use
Prece de Cura
Prece de Cura
without any of those absorbs will be weaker, but that will be offset by the times when you do have the absorbs. All of that ignores the argument that an absorb is probably stronger than a direct heal so maybe the ratio shouldn't even be 1:1.
* - This seems to be the most misunderstood portion of the philosophy. We want Disc to use
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
. It's one of their signature spells. We don't want Disc to blanket the entire raid and use nothing but
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
. But we are so far from that now -- we see almost no
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
, except for
or to proc
Corpo e Alma
. You won't be able to put
Palavra de Poder: Escudo
on 10 or 25 people before the dragon breathes, but you shouldn't have to. You have other healers backing you up and all of you have several cooldowns (and yes PW:B counts) when you're really in trouble.
Oh, and there's no point in making Fade an escape tool. If the priest is running at 100%, gets slowed, but uses his "escape tool" to go back to 100%; IT STILL DOES NOTHING SINCE THE PERSON COMING AFTER HIM IS RUNNING AT 100%.
"Escape tool" does not mean "nobody can ever catch you." Abilities have counters and pre-counters.
was a movement ability with a damage avoidance mechanic (that allowed you to go offensive with less of a chance for retribution) on a tier with two movement abilities. The other talents are never going to compete with that.
I'm just offering a general statement here, and I'm not calling any of you out personally, but we see a lot of feedback of the form "X doesn't work because it can be countered." That is the entire point.
PvP works better, in our opinions, when you have to be smart and react to what other players are doing. That means trying to guess what they're going to do next or deciding the right time for a crutch dispel or CC. If you find yourself asking for something to be undispellable, or to punish someone for dispelling it, or you're asking for something to work while crowd controlled, or something that makes you immune to something, or something that overall leaves your opponent no options, we're very unlikely to make those changes. Yes, all of those mechanics still exist, though we are trying to design as many as possible out of the game. We're much more likely to consider tools that have a counter, not tools that cannot be countered.
And now you want to take that away too, you're turning the talent into a
Bênção da Liberdade
that has a longer cooldown and a shorter duration. Despite the buffs to disc I feel this is a big and unnecessary blow to a spec that's already struggling.
While we want to see more healing priests in PvP, we don't think the right way to do that is through a really annoying defensive mechanic like this.
Single target damage is bad for shadow priests, and the only changes we're getting so far are:
We haven't made many PvE damage adjustments at all. We will. It's possible Shadow lost too much damage while moving in PvE. Nearly all of these Shadow changes were to tone them down in PvP.
There are two issues in situations like this. First, there is the question of whether the three talent options are relatively attractive. Second, there is the question of whether any of them are overpowered. You can't just say the second issue is always part of the first issue, and letting players choose any of three overpowered talents isn't going to be great for player balance.
We do think Shadow needs PvP nerfs, but not PvE nerfs, and we also want to be careful not to nerf any of the utility that Shadow brings in PvE. (For example nerfing
Dissipação em Massa
for Shadow, possibly through the glyph is a common suggestion, but we like that Shadow's
Dissipação em Massa
can be really beneficial in PvE).
is particularly annoying to deal with because being untargetable is so powerful. The intent of the talent was to make
more powerful as an escape tool, but we just overdid it with the untargeting part.
- cooldown increased to 2 min (from 90 sec).
- no longer resets the cooldown of
Manto das Sombras
Manto das Sombras
- cooldown reduced to 60 sec (from 2 min).
This post is from the perspective of an Elemental Shaman that mainly focuses on PvP.
You commented on a lot of different things, which makes it hard for me to offer responses. (In general players tend to try to cover too many different topics in a single post instead of focusing on the 2-3 that really, really matter). I will try to cover a few though.
While it’s fun to have lots of minor glyphs, they really are targeted at fun, and this thread is supposed to be about the nuts and bolts of rotations and set bonuses, so it’s beyond the scope of this discussion.
We agree Elemental have too many mandatory glyphs, and we did give you the most mandatory one (Flame Shock) as a base mechanic in 5.2.
I disagree with you some on
. We see a lot of Elemental shaman using it. It’s not the dominant talent (Earthgrab is) but it definitely isn’t niche.
I also disagree with you on the prevalence of dispels. Dispels are precious in MoP. I know it might seem like anything awesome you do gets instantly removed, but your opponent has to make the choice to blow their CD on your
(which has a lower CD than the dispel). We are really trying to move away from undispellable mechanics on enemies. In Cataclysm and before, dispels weren't a choice and we agree that anything got removed too quickly. We're not really in that world anymore, and we think that's a huge improvement.
I keep getting a lot of lols on Twitter about
, but we think this is a pretty serious buff for Elemental in PvP (esp. considering the glyph). It’s an exciting change. We’ll see if we’re right.
- now behaves as though any replaced or destroyed totem was active for a minimum of 1 sec, even if the totem is dropped and grabbed for a shorter time period.
Totem de Baluarte Pétreo
- the totem now has 10% of the Shaman's health, much like Mana Tide and Healing Tide.
Guardião da Natureza
- now preserves the Shaman's health percentage when it expires.
- We are reverting the removal of
is now Blood Horror and is a 4 sec horror effect instead of a fear. It otherwise works as it does on the PTR.
- we are reverting the nerf to the heal not working while stunned. We think we have nerfed Arms enough for PvP reasons in 5.2.
Looks like they need to just go ahead and buff Arms rage generation.
We’re hearing really mixed feedback on Arms’ rage at the moment and I suspect there is still a lot of experimentation and/or theorycrafting required to figure out when to use
vs. Slam vs. Heroic Strike. (To be clear, we have a design, but we're not sure it's working yet.) Warriors nearly always ask for more, more, more rage, so just seeing posts requesting the same won’t be sufficient to convince us. Overall though, more analysis of how Arms rotation feels (in PvE and PvP) would be helpful.
So let me get this straigt, TFB will reduce the cost of
as well? Or does using OP reduce the cost of
by 10 for X seconds? Sounds like the second one which is not bad tbh. Means
replaces Slam in the rotation (Unless with excess rage in Zerker Stance with CS up) which it should,
hits have a 25% chance of resetting the cooldown on your
hits have a 100% chance of making any
free for 10 sec.
I'm glad for warriors that you decided to revert the additional nerfs to spell=29838], but there is still a potential problem with it and that tier. The problem is that it's mandatory for warriors to take because it is so necessary for their viability.
We actually agree with this, but allow me to explain our logic. As a designer, one of the things you often have to struggle with is idealistic design vs. realistic design. In a pure design space, we believe
are balanced and spell=29838] is overpowered. However, we’re not talking about a theoretical game. It’s a real, living game played by millions of players. Our changes have impact. Arms warriors (and Frost mages and a couple of other specs) have been hammered with PvP nerfs since launch, and not at all because the players did anything wrong. The new patch brings a few more hefty Arms nerfs with
Onda de Choque
. We’re not trying to kill Arms in PvP and we’re not trying to make anyone who plays Arms hopelessly depressed. In this case we think it’s acceptable to have spell=29838] be a little overpowered so long as Arms as a whole is not dramatically overpowered or underpowered. Long term, it’s the kind of thing we’d like to eventually fix, but in the short term, we think nerfing it does more harm than good.
Now moving into patch 5.2 We'll have a similar feel except we'll have a lot of GCDs where we can't do anything because we've blown our rage on AOE. We'll proably go...
> Thunderclap >
> Twiddle our thumbs for 3 seconds while we wait for
to come off CD. We don't have that filler of overpower to do something else whilel we wait.
This could be a problem. We’ll look into it more. Off the cuff, we could make
20 rage (just for Arms!) to keep parity with the cheaper
We have a problem right now where melee of all kinds are not very attractive for super-competitive RBG teams, except possibly as a flag carrier, in which case you probably want a druid or warrior. This isn’t the kind of thing we’re going to easily solve by just throwing all sorts of amazing utility at every melee spec, but we agree it’s a problem and we’re looking at longer term solutions.
We use PTR as a time of iteration to try out a lot of changes and see which ones work out or not. We think the time has come to revert some of the PvP nerfs that we made for noble reasons, but which aren't working out. Specifically, we wanted to remove blanket silences and shift the game back more towards casting and interrupts. We think the continual arms race between instant spells, silences and silence immunity isn't good for the long term health of PvP. It is a shift we still plan to make, but we don't think patch 5.2 is the right time to make it. There are a great deal of instant spells and we don't think it is fair or reasonable to remove them all and force so many players (many of whom might not even participate in PvP) to re-learn their class mid-expansion.
I also want to reiterate that we see very little PvP participation during the PTR. This isn't really too surprising since it takes a sizable time commitment and a critical mass of skilled players to really generate good Arena or BG testing. (By contrast, guilds trying out the new raid encounters gives us a lot of PvE testing.) We're not blaming anyone - PvP is just hard to measure until it gets into the "real world," so we are even more dependent on player feedback. Unfortunately, PvP feedback is even more subjective than PvE feedback for a number of reasons, including the lack of meaningful meters, the challenge of keeping in mind the evolving tapestry of changes to all classes, and of course the very human tendency that makes it easy for some players to be quick to take credit for their victories and quick to blame their class for their defeats. :)
This just means PvP balance is always going to take a lot of iteration. We appreciate your patience and all of the good feedback that we get.
We can't test PVP on the PTR because you disabled queueing for battlegrounds and didn't give premades PVP gear.
There are currently some bugs preventing BG queuing from working on the PTR, but I've been through enough of these PTRs to predict that even once those bugs are fixed, we'll see very few players participating. We have occasionally tried "BGs with the blues" and similar tactics, and maybe there are some other ways to encourage or even reward participation that we could consider.
If you do participate and share your feedback with us, then you are our hero. On the other hand, we still do get a lot of good feedback based on patch notes / upcoming changes posts. That is part of the patch development process as well.
We still plan on making it easy to try out the PvP and PvE gear on PTR once those items are built and relatively bug free.
Either you need find a way to better weed out the bad feedback or your team needs better personal understanding of PvP. Patch 5.0 warriors were IMO worse than S5 DK's.
But do you see all of the warriors claiming that they are just fine now and have been over-nerfed for 5.2? Sure, it's easy just to dismiss them as wrong, but how do we know? How should we know during MoP development when warriors were coming off a bad Cataclysm season and begging for buffs? With 20/20 hindsight, I'll totally agree that we overdid it. How to ensure that we don't get it wrong next time? We'll keep listening to players and discussing their feedback. For PvP particularly, that's really the only way I know of to get things feeling right.
If anyone out there can provide the definitive list of players who are nearly always right, please let me know. :)
Some of us feel that making PvP better should be an extremely high priority even at the expense of some players feeling a bit confused when logging in after a patch.
Totally reasonable. Some players feel like more pet battle content is an extremely high priority. It's even possible there are more of them than there are PvP players. (I have no idea off the top of my head.) I would hope by the sheer number of PvP-oriented changes we've pushed and the number of conversations we've had that it's a priority, but I get that these things are subjective.
So you have no problems making warriors or shaman relearn their class mechanics mid-expansion?
No, we have a huge problem with it. It sucks and it's ultimately our fault. On the other hand, it doesn't seem fair to make other players live with overpowered specs because of our mistake. (This applies to PvE too by the way, where it's not okay for someone to be overpowered even if you aren't trying to kill each other.)
And this reasoning right here is why my account is canceled as of the 28th.
I'm sorry that you cancelled your account. I am even sorrier that you cancelled for a change we didn't make and stated we didn't want to make (removing haste gameplay from paladins). There may be a lesson in there about making decisions in the heat of the moment.
In 5.2, no healer will be able to live through the opener of a Mage/Rogue/X comp, blanket silences, instant CC and stuns will just make those 2 classes very strong together for anyother combination of classes to combat.
That's a healer point of view, and I get that, but from the warlock or mage point of view, it was going to be impossible to ever kill anyone because the healer can't be interrupted with all of those instant heals and a silence-prevention cooldown on top of that. I'm just pointing out there are two sides to the argument, and it's not fair to just claim that you're right and they're wrong.
The reality is that moving more towards the 'interrupt heals, don't prevent them' paradigm would be wonderful. But a huge amount of changes to a great many classes need to be made to make that possible. 5.2 just isn't the time for that. I don't even think it's realistic this expansion, but I'll be they'll try.
Yeah, exactly, and we could even make the time, but we'd be scared of the huge number of changes it would take to get there. We're also concerned that some players might not even like the PvP style that we ended up with. We get requests constantly for dispel protection, impossible to counter abilities, stuff that works while CC'd and immunities to various mechanics. Those are all in the opposite direction of where we think PvP needs to go, so we have to factor in player response to all of that and leave even more design time and space for iteration.
Encantamento de Tirania Gloriosa - Arma
weapon enchant was modified to 400 PvP Power, 200 Resilience, and 50% disarm Duration.
(No melee classes would have used it without the disarm duration.)
Are you telling me that not only is this issue understood, but is considered acceptable? Being spammed with out of range while you're clipping someone elses model is incredibly frustrating and a major turn off to playing the game at all. It swings both ways too, being stunned by a melee ability from someone 20yds away is just awesome. I had hoped something would eventually be done to fix this crap.
Which would be acceptable? That the nose of the cat is considered the center of the model, so that anyone chasing you has to hit your nose? Or that cats just have a huge combat reach (which also means everyone else can hit you much easier than they could a smaller model)? Should tauren for that matter be easier to hit and gnomes harder? Trust me that this is a very old and involved debate in game design – the code does not always agree with the art about where your character is located, and that is particularly true on a client-server game that still tries to offer some semblance of snappy combat.
1. Are you happy with how many different categories there are?
2. Are you happy that some abilities affect more than one DR category?
3. Are you happy CC is so complicated, that not even sites like Arena Junkies can track how they all interact?
4. If you are not happy, would you please please please consider reworking CC and DR and make it transparent in the tool tips?
Our sense is that there probably 2-3 too many different categories. I also totally agree that the system is way too opaque, especially for new players. Mentioning DR and perhaps PvP CC durations in the tooltips (perhaps only in PvP, perhaps only as an advanced option) is something we’ve wanted to do for some time (so is Path of the Titans, so is Dance Studio… you know how it goes).
We also talk often about whether the game would be better off with only a single DR category. It makes it easier to learn for sure. But it’s also a really risky change. Much of the depth of PvP skill involves knowing what ability DRs with what. A lot of Arena comps are built on that mechanic. It gives us a lot of room to provide surgical buffs or nerfs by changing which DRs with what. Overall, I think there is a chance we would scale down the number of different DRs, but it’s a small chance. We’re much more likely to just spell them out more explicitly (which to be fair also chips away at the knowledge base that differentiates an expert PvP player from a merely tolerable one).
That's what I'm trying to say in more attention grabbing ways. I can try running the numbers in simcraft or wrathcalcs if that will help, but I'm not the math expert that some of the silent laser chickens are.
Nope, you did a fine job. It will take us some time to analyze all this, but I wanted to drop a quick note to say we appreciate the work.
MAKE SEPARATE TALENTS FOR PVE AND PVP!!!!
I’ll refrain from the caps, but we do that all the time. Check out
. Check out (live)
. Check out the duration on
. We do it as a last resort, because it does cause more risk for bugs and is more for players to have to remember, but when it’s the right solution, we definitely go there. We nerfed
’s up front damage because that reduces PvP burst without having a huge impact on PvE (because the difference in burst in this case is over such a short time frame it’s unlikely to really be felt). If that solution hadn’t worked, then we could have considered DP to do less damage in PvP.
I'll also posit that even if PvE and PvP had totally different rule sets, it wouldn't reduce the volume of players campaigning for buffs or nerfs. "Everyone" would still think it was their class holding them back and would want us to twiddle with the numbers even more. Once in awhile we'll say something like "We'd love to help you guys, but we just can't buff you any more because of PvE / PvP." The more typical situation is that someone thinks they need a buff while we disagree. Splitting out the rules doesn't change that. :)
Adquira o Wowhead Premium
Gosta do nosso conteúdo? Que tal virar um
Usuário Premium do Wowhead
para nos apoiar? A tela de um usuário Premium não possui anúncios, além de várias outras vantagens!
[Show 0 Comments]
[Hide 0 Comments]
Faça Login Para Comentar
Você não está conectado. Favor
registrar uma conta
para adicionar seu comentário.
« Próxima Notícia
Notícia Anterior »