Skip to Content
2-27-2009 @ 3:04PM
@max_bmw These statements actually are not at all contradictory, they're just in different contexts. What I think the dev team wants is an environment where there are some buffs that are just great... so great that pretty much every raid should have them, then there are other buffs that are good, but not good enough to make them so good that they severely affect the raid if the raid doesn't have them. The difference is a boss encounter needs to be designed presuming the great buffs, since they affect a group so much, but not necessarily the good buffs. Now if a boss is designed with a specific buff in mind, then that buff approaches 'required' status. It would be hard to beat the boss without it. So, let me go through these quotes: 1st quote: Yes, it would be nice if you had some insane, killer buff, only you. So that way your raid would always have to take you, no matter what. That makes for trouble though since you effectively wield massive power over the raid that isn't based on how well you play, but what button you clicked on character creation. It does feel nice to be indispensable and unique, but that doesn't make for good game design... so no buff should be completely necessary. GC does say there buffs that are 'required', but that's only a way of saying they're so good, that they affect the design of an encounter. No player buff should ever be required to beat a boss, and no player buff so be so great that you always need it no matter what. 2nd quote: It should now be possible to bring a wide array of different classes and specs and still get all the buffs you want since so many of them are equivalent and overwrite each other. This way the really good buffs are more common so no one gets benched just because they happen to want to play a certain class. 3rd quote: Let me paraphrase this quote... 'Replenishment is a really good buff, it is really useful, and we design encounters presuming your mana-users have it. We also gave more of these really good buffs to multiple classes and specs so that it is more likely you'll have them so while maybe one person may want to respec to bring replenishment, at least they're not getting benched for a PuG player that does' Here is an alternate suggestion... since you seem to dislike how buffs are handled... how about Blizz just drops all of them. Out. Gone. Now.. did the list of reasons to bring certain classes get longer or shorter? DK: Personally I have not seen DKs being shunned. That's just me on my server though... in fact, sometimes my guild's Naxx-10 raids have up to 3 DKs in them. My guess would be though that the DK class is new, and cool, and there are lot of Deth Kaniggits that are really, really bad... making PuGs call for non-DKs. Rogues: I definitely agree here. Actually I think the Rogue class really just needs a reworking, a lot like Paladin. The problem is Rogue was always too strong in PvP and often too strong in PvE. Steadily their PvE use has fallen off while their ability in PvP has just recently started to erode... so really, only recently, has Blizz ever been in a position where they kinda needed to buff Rogues. This likely won't be fixed any time soon. I've never really liked the way Blizz has handled Rogues from day 1, but I'm not a Blizz dev.. so... too bad for me. Blizz has posted they are concerned about Rogues. Warlocks: I don't think so. Blizz has been very conscientious with locks. I've seen them doing very nice DPS and they now have their uber summon. Demo needs some help and Destro I think could use some tweaks, but Blizz has posted saying this already, and I've seen locks filling their ranged DPS role just fine. Paladins: Yes. Paladins are way, way too useful I think. Paladins quite possibly border on the edge of 'way too good'.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.