Breakfast Topic: Class Reviews
by Elizabeth Harper 
Jul 24th 2006 at 11:30AM
With patch 1.12, we will have seen talent reviews for every class in the game. Every class has seen changes - both small and large - since the game's launch, and Blizzard has stated that there won't be any more large-scale reviews of this nature in the future. With that in mind, which class do you think has come out on top after this review process? I cannot, personally, think of a clear winner for PvE or PvP, as there is still much to be said for a player's specific build and skill, regardless of class. However, do any of you see a particular class winning out above all the rest?
Filed under: Patches, Breakfast Topics
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
AcceptableRisk Jul 24th 2006 12:22PM
I still think Shaman got the short end. Despite notions that still float around about how "wtfbroken" the shaman class is, they're still not nearly as useful as a paladin at level 60. Their class review didn't really do much aside from reduce the mana cost and/or increase the duration of totems. Then, rather than deal with the imbalance by reexamining the totem system altogether, they just announce that they'll allow paladins and shamen on both sides. While, I'm not necessarily against the idea, it certainly seems like the easy way out.
I think Warlocks clearly came out the big winner. They went from what was perhaps one of the weakest classes in the game to the one that many people feel is blatantly overpowered.
James Jul 24th 2006 12:22PM
IMHO, I haven't read the new rogue tree, nor play a rogue, so I couldn't give my opinion there. I'd say the most nerfed was mage, followed closely with a hunter (such as their FD/icetrap with pet combo for PVE), and largely think that paladin's need more nerfing. Maybe give them more healing/dmg-wise spec and make them less invincible (this is coming from an 60 alliance end-game, not a horde char). PvP pally's are just totally dumb, I'm glad to see BE's getting pallys, however with their racial skills, they _will_ be invincible. Only time will tell. Mage's are still quite strong, but I think if any class catches a mage off guard, they can easily get owned.
As for future patches, they're just going to pro-long the tier set. New patch, new set, noobies to the game get farther from being in an end-game guild, and solo'ing people will just complain more that they can't get epics to compete against tier X. Well duh, if they make solo epics as good as people that play end-game, there would be no point to end game. And don't even say people that have no life have to be end-game. I play a level 60 NE Female Hunter (har har), since mid-Feb, and am now in one of the best guilds on my server, Elune (in Eitrigg). I am partly tier 1/2 mixed, with doom's edge and a MH warblade. I work 40 hours a week, yet still manage to make every raid for 3-4 hours 5 nights a week. People that do things besides WoW can still get good gear, you just need to understand the game and get good at it. :)
GG all.
roXet Jul 24th 2006 12:31PM
Warlocks never had a talent review, all this "over powered" crap stems from a single ability that we would all give up for some real survavibility.
moonmaster Jul 24th 2006 12:39PM
warlocks. warlocks warlocks warlocks.
warlocks > *
CBG Jul 24th 2006 12:39PM
"People that do things besides WoW can still get good gear, you just need to understand the game and get good at it"
This statement makes no sense coming from a guy that raids 4 hours a night. Give me a break.
Swiftlydead Jul 24th 2006 12:57PM
Warlocks seems to be the consensus in the circles I communicate with, though being an undead rogue, I dont see it myself. Will of the Forsaken + PvP trinket makes Warlocks just another squishy cloth wearer to me...
Belurme Jul 24th 2006 1:00PM
Exactly 4.
Some of us who work 40 hours a week (as I do) or those of us who go to school (college in the fall), have to devote those precious hours after work to other endevours. Believe me, if I had the time to devote to the game like that I would.
Anyway, on topic, I think that Warlocks definitely got the benefit of the reviews. I don't necessarily know what lost but what I would have liked for Pallys is to gain one more (could be real weak) ranged spell/attack at the lower levels. I know that I'd love to have had another ranged option instead of the multiple bubble options. (Pretty much I'd have sacrificed a bubble type for a ranged attack).
sollaires Jul 24th 2006 1:35PM
I'd also say warlocks, if only because they went from an allegedly nearly unplayable class to one that many fear (no pun intended). Well, and while the talent trees are pretty good, there's still a TON of crap talents in there (review afflication plaz).
At some point along the line, hunters also became very powerful. Inititally, they weren't too special.
Druids have also gotten a nice break from Blizz with the trainable Innervate.
*Most* of the changes have been needed to buff a class to compete with the others. Although I still hate hunters, even though I duo with my girlfriend's hunter all the time.
Ardaughu Jul 24th 2006 1:42PM
I'm going to have to agree saying the Warlock definately came out on top in the overall talent review. I'm a 60 orc hunter on the Laughing Skull server and I have had numerous experiences with Warlocks in Battle Grounds. It ended up me getting owned 3/4 of the times :D. The saying your gear reflects the way you spec your character is very true but in relation to Warlocks it is insanely true. With their highest tier set and certain spec (not sure what it is) they are godly. I've seen my 60 shamon friend get owned by one and I then jumped in as support and ended up dieing as well but taking the lock down with me. I may sound like a noob but I am very skilled with the hunter class having two 60 hunters but the Warlocks pack a bigger punch if you can't get that vital first crit off.
In conclusion in order to defeat this class you need to go big or go home.
For The Horde
Raleigh Jul 24th 2006 1:51PM
"I work 40 hours a week, yet still manage to make every raid for 3-4 hours 5 nights a week."
Are you kidding me?? Dude, you are an idiot if you think the above comment equals "understand the game and get good at it."
stapleboy Jul 24th 2006 1:52PM
I haven't played every class, but it seems to me that talent reviews = buffs. Most of the people who whine lost one or two minor things in return for two or three equally great talent trees - boo hoo. I had a hunter and loved the changes they made.... I have a holy priest and a feral druid and think they made huge improvements to both.
As to Blizzard's future plans, I refer to comments from James above: "I work 40 hours a week, yet still manage to make every raid for 3-4 hours 5 nights a week." Well, that's like having a second job, and hopefully the expansion team's focus on small group content will fix things for the rest of us!
Will Jul 24th 2006 2:07PM
"And don't even say people that have no life have to be end-game...I work 40 hours a week, yet still manage to make every raid for 3-4 hours 5 nights a week."
Life is what happens when you're not at work and not sitting in front of your keyboard. 15-20 hours playing WoW per week is ridiculously impossible for people with lives who wish to maintain intrapersonal relationships with friends and family.
Ghostle Jul 24th 2006 2:22PM
I have played almost every class in the game (the exception being shamans and priests). To tell you the truth, the warlocks talents are messed up, they really need a second look. Where other classes get a 1 point ability (if they wish) at tier 3, 5, and 7, the affliction tree has two 1 point skills at tier 5 (siphon life and curse of exhaustion), not to mention in tier 7 of the demonology tree they have improve spellstone, which is garbage.
Dan Jul 24th 2006 2:29PM
Yeah I have to agree with all the other posters who think that 15-20 hours a week playing World of Warcraft is a bit much, that is the definition of "no life"...
So you work 40 hours, Raid 20 hours. Thats 60 hours. Lets say you sleep 8 hours a day, 8x7=56 hours sleeping. Now lets assume you eat for 2 hours a day. That counts eating the food, preparation, going to get it, gracery shopping. I think thats fair. So thats about 14 hours, we'll even throw in shower/shave/dress in there with that for those that eat quickly. thats 130 hours Working/Sleeping/WoW/eating. That leaves 22 hours or about 3 hours a day to do everything else there is in life. Go to the movies, read a book, hang out with friends, do some community service. yada yada yada.
Zequel Jul 24th 2006 3:10PM
In the northern hemisphere, we get 168 (7x24) hours not 152 (130+22) Dan. Where do you live? :) I'm a casual player, don't raid much but have been known to play 20 hrs/week. I usually play Sun night-Thu, around 3-4 hours. Usually between 9-1. I reserve my weekend nights for friends, weekend days for family and getting stuff done, weekend evenings for my wife. Sometimes I play with my wife. I get about 6 hours of sleep a night. I read books on my lunch and commute. No kids yet. No community service for me. I still have an active social life and go on vacation 6-8 times a year.
My point is that I can fit 20 hours in and still have a life. A large percentage of people watch TV for more than 20 hours a week. I watch about an hour a week and maybe a movie or 2 a week.
Relmstein Jul 24th 2006 4:52PM
I think warlocks have come out on top in PvP while warriors still seem to be the masters of PvE.
twh Jul 24th 2006 5:14PM
If there were any clear winners here, it was the locks and the mages. If there were any clear losers, it was the paladins and the shamans. But the Paladins are probably the biggest losers because they had no prior warning, while everyone else did with their review.
rinks Jul 24th 2006 6:58PM
Just to address an earlier comment: anyone that thinks pallies need nerfing either 1) hasn't played the game since the first month up to level 30 or 2) is so inept at PVP that they manage to lose to them. I'm a pally, and I like my pally, but few classes outside of shaman have taken the same beating ability-wise.
Also, the comments about playing for 15-20 hours a week meaning you 'have no life': in my experience, the people that make comments like this spend the same amount of time (or more) planted on their fat a55e5 in front of the television, which is somehow more "dignified" than playing a videogame.
Michael Jul 24th 2006 11:03PM
Warriors need a review and I have to say I will be pissed if we don't get antoher one. Only a few changes need to be made -- move Tactical Mastery to a trained skill and replace it with Improved Tactical Mastery that increases points rretained. The Stamina boost skill need to be added to the Protection skil and adjust the cost of a few items to allow more flexibility in build construction.
These do not require a full review and would make it a much funner class to play with only minor balance impacts
Dan Jul 25th 2006 3:15AM
Haha, yeah look at that! thats like 38 hours left, where does my time go? Oh well, back to the game. Its been 12 hours since I posted and I've been playing since, :P