Breakfast Topic: The effect of nerfs and buffs
by Allison Robert 
Jan 10th 2010 at 8:00AM
Blizzard's observed in the past that there's often a correlation between the perception of a class as overpowered and the number of people who choose to play it (witness the proliferation of rogues in classic WoW, for example), so it seems fair to say that at least a portion of the player base's class choice is impacted by the conclusion they reach on design decisions. Then again, my own experience in-game -- and the pattern of comment votes here on WoW.com concerning class changes -- leads me to believe that yo-yoing between classes based on which one is doing "best" at any given time is not the overwhelming trend. The Warcraft Census' numbers on class population also seem to be evening out, slowly but surely, from a little bit over 6 months ago (which was itself an improvement over very lopsided numbers in favor of death knights and paladins shortly after Wrath went live). This would seem to suggest that, over the long term, people continue to play the class they like most for reasons that survive design changes. Or is it just that each character represents such a significant time investment that most people don't think it's worth it to switch mains?
I'm sure that arena and PvP as a whole wind up driving a portion of this, but what impact do class nerfs and buffs really have? If your main was ever nerfed, did you wind up playing a different toon, or did it just not matter that much to you? If your main was buffed, was it genuinely more fun to play?
Filed under: Breakfast Topics
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
Oskjable Jan 10th 2010 8:06AM
I play a ret paladin, and in 3.0 when you know, we were OMG OP11!! NERFZZZ, that was ofc fun to play but a game has to be balanced to work out, though now we are pretty nerfed to the ground and I think just a slight buff for us would'nt hurt to much, like maybe give us SoV stack from crusader strike in pve, and in pvp we could use more offensive abilities, maybe a silence?
Oskjable Jan 10th 2010 8:08AM
Forgot to add, I will probably keep playing my paladin even if we get even more nerfed etc, I love the paladin so much that I even have 2x lvl 80 pallies, (one horde and one ally), and I don't think blizzard would make our class "a free kill" again so I will hold on to my paladin(s) until I get bored with them.
Tapukimastra Jan 10th 2010 8:43AM
Despite all the nerfs I think the AoW Exorcism synergy made us SO much more fun to play; despite it's previous instant cast it became much more fun timing it with AoW, and debating whether it's worth using or if you need a FoL.
Elmo Jan 10th 2010 10:35AM
I've been playing an Enh Shaman for 3 years now, I would hate to see it become an overpowered FotM some time. I rather be slightly underpowered than get my spec a bad reputation because of some clueless FotM rerollers, because I -do- know how to play.
unfortunately I suspect Enh Shamans will be OP in cataclysm because of the total talent revamp needed because Hunters get focus.
Nick S Jan 10th 2010 12:32PM
I'd say Ret is in a pretty good place in PvE at the moment. In PvP, though, I agree that they could use some kind of improvement.
James Jan 10th 2010 6:31PM
To be honest I hate how blizzard balances classes. It will nerf a class for PVP reasons when it's doing fine in PVE. And then to make up for the unintentional PVE nerf, it'll buff something else. Which then makes the class unbalanced in PVP. And forces blizzard to nerf something for PVP purposes.
A nerf makes me less likely to PVP with that class is all. I stopped playing arena altogether, cause I got sick about how class dependent the fights were, and also how gear dependent. Very little of it has to do with skill. Or at least, skill doesn't really matter until you're rated very high in the first place. Because only then do you have the gear to not make that an issue.
SpyderTaco (XBL: Zergvasion) Jan 10th 2010 8:08AM
Past few days all I've been able to read in trade chat (other than cursing / anal [item]) is people complaining about the nerfing of Rogues.
I honestly don't think it does anything to my experience at all. Anytime my class has been nerfed it has just made me work harder at being better. I think nerfs / buffs are essential to the overall balance of the game and people need to realize that Blizzard doesn't just blow this all out of their ass, there is a point to everything they're doing. We don't know what they plan to implement in the future that may justify those nerfs.
MusedMoose Jan 10th 2010 8:52AM
"I think nerfs / buffs are essential to the overall balance of the game and people need to realize that Blizzard doesn't just blow this all out of their ass, there is a point to everything they're doing."
THANK YOU. This, a thousand times this. I wish more people realized this - from all the complaints I've heard, you'd think Blizzard had publicly announced that their class nerf/buff stuff was based around a dartboard and tequila.
Aedilhild Jan 10th 2010 10:07AM
And then there are the players convinced that the dev team is comprised of malicious know-nothings who spend work time discovering ways to ruin their fun. . . . Really?
videvekartuspaan Jan 10th 2010 1:03PM
Sometimes the dev teams are spoiling your fun. why? For everyone elses.
McCombs Jan 10th 2010 1:57PM
I agree with Spyder. My main is a Balance Druid, so I know a bit about the up and down ride, but I always stay with him. However, I did level a Paladin as prot (back during BC when both pallys and prot leveling was awful) just because I liked Paladins. Once they became OP during early Wrath I did switch him to ret and began leveling him again (he had stalled out in Zangarmarsh). I had a good time with it, but now hes been sitting in Howling Fjord for months b/c my only true class is Druid.
Sihylm Jan 10th 2010 2:50PM
Charges on the BB gun show that Devs hate fun-time items :(
kalatash Jan 10th 2010 3:36PM
What changes to the BB gun?
Sehvekah Jan 10th 2010 5:40PM
This.
I've played a Rogue since I started WoW(back around the end of 2.3, IIRC). I chose Rogue because that tends to be my favorite class/play-style in RPGs. I like pickpocketing for fun and profit, I enjoy lock-picking and the whole idea of saying "Fuck You" to keys in general, I *love* stealth in ways that probably arn't entirely healthy, in general the whole idea of Rogues as people who "work smarter, not harder" to get shit done is just something that really resonates with me.
I've dabbled in other classes, and found that that they've each got their own awesomeness to savor, but when you get down to it, the day my Rogue isn't my main is probably the day I quit playing WoW.
Buffs make the game a little sweeter, nerfs are minor but necessary inconveniences, but neither determine the class I play, they only *tweak* how I play it.
Ruth Jan 10th 2010 6:04PM
Something I'm hating about playing my Mut rogue at the moment is that the devs buffed one talent, Murder, only to nerf the 51 point talent, Hunger for Blood, to compensate for the huge DPS increase the new Murder gave. Why didn't they just revert Murder back to what it was? Why make it an almost essential two points instead of allowing people to pick 'the fun talents' as they like to talk about? [Conversations on Subtlety much?]
The fact that they nerfed a 51 point talent again is ridiculous. So much for 51 point talents being 'class defining'. A 5% damage increase? Compare that to Killing Spree, to Shadowdance, to Metamorphosis, to Thunderstorm, to Titan's Grip, to Divine Storm. They give us a 4% damage increase half the tree back.
And yes, I totally recognise HfB is much simpler than it's original 30sec, bleed-eating incarnation, but it does seem as though that single point could be spent elsewhere, say, another percent of crit thanks to Close-Quarters Combat for a similar increase, saving worry about a self-buff, a cooldown and the necessity of maintaining bleeds on the mob/s.
BigBadGooz Jan 10th 2010 10:04PM
Shaman tstorm is mostly a pvp/self Rez need mana deal now days unfortunatly it dosent provide a dps rotation worth haveing unfortnatly.
Ruth Jan 11th 2010 2:23AM
@ BigBadGooz
The point wasn't so much the DPS, as the fact that they can nerf a 51 point talent, dropping it to one third of it's previous strength, and consider it a good option for balance.
What if they nerfed the mana regen of Thunderstorm by two thirds? Would there be a point in taking it anymore? What if they dropped the 110% damage on four targets down to 40% damage on 2 targets for the paladin's Divine Storm? There'd be a loud cry of foul about it.
If they can't balance it properly, maybe they should buff Murder to 5/10% for all targets and then make the 51 point Assassination talent once again into something 'class defining'.
Zinn Jan 10th 2010 8:09AM
The nerf would have to be quite severe for me not to play a class. If they change some mechanics about a class so that I no longer feel I can do my role for instance. Like if they'd lower healing output by a healer class with 50% or something like that. I've never had an issue with "maining" several chars though, so I often switch to whatever I like most for the moment. I know some people like to put all their time into one.
The main reason I don't play some classes today, and so far I've only disliked rogues and dk's, is because I've never really liked the melee-dps playstyle. But with druid/warrior/paladin/shaman there are options to melee dps. (Tanking as dk feels like dpsing :P)
I remember a while ago when my boyfriend complained about druid nerfs, again. I simply told him "if they're that horrible, just play the classes you think are op, or don't play at all. If you continue to play druid they can't be that boring or bad". But I suppose if you really invest a lot of time and effort into one thing, it hurts even more when they become less good without you being to do anything about it.
iammurlocftw Jan 10th 2010 10:45AM
"tanking as DK feels like dpsing"
That's cause it is dpsing. you just go in there, lay down the aoes and start spreading plagues around. now i haven't played dk sense 3.2 but thats how i always tanked anyone please correct me if im wrong. personally that's why i liked tanking on dk was because i was basicaly doing a damage rotation that never really lost agro.
on the note of the breakfast topic, if they made it so warlocks did half the damage of mage I'd go back and try to level my shaman or priest up
Eisengel Jan 10th 2010 8:12PM
"But I suppose if you really invest a lot of time and effort into one thing, it hurts even more when they become less good without you being to do anything about it."
Definitely. That's partially why I stopped playing WoW. The class I like has longstanding problems that have never been addressed seriously (i.e. a dev says 'oh problem X is feature, hur-hur-hur'), and it has had bad scaling in every expansion so far, and has had its major strengths completed changed in BC, and then essentially reversed in Wrath. It's not that I'm annoyed over the time I spent, but I like the feel and theme of the class/spec, and when the devs hamfistedly alter the strengths and weaknesses to be entirely different, I have to relearn all the painful little tricks and tweaks and timings all over again - in essence, I have to rediscover how to play my class - again. The thing that really burns me is that part-in-parcel with the class' problems is terrible scaling. Players I know I can massively out-play slowly begin to out-perform me as we progress through gear levels. This terrible scaling could easily be fixed by addressing the problems the community has documented... for years, which the developers seem to be uninterested in doing.
WoW isn't a single-player game that you pay once for. You pay a subscription, which essentially goes for the development and maintenance of the multiplayer aspect. In my view the development is nowhere near worth the cost - so I fired Blizzard. If and when they make changes that are necessary to the class I play, I'll be happy to rehire them. Until then, they are free to continue in their stubborn refusal that nothing is wrong without my dollars in their pocket.