Patch 5.4 patch notes
Virtual Realms feature revealed
The Proving Grounds are coming
The latest patch 5.4 newsDon't freak out about the Cataclysm changes yet
by Gregg Reece 
Apr 12th 2010 at 1:00PM
One important thing to remember (and something Ghostcrawler and other devs have stressed multiple times) is that almost all numbers, coefficients and bonuses are going to be changing when the expansion ships, and none of the abilities are final. This means trying to say that using certain spells or stats is a "horrible idea" because of particular issues in the current game doesn't really hold up, because your class might end up needing that stat or relying on that spell when Cataclysm hits.
Also, being as the entire stat system is getting a revamp (with a lot of the current stats going away or being repurposed completely), all of your current gear's stats will also be changing to reflect this including increased armor for cloth, leather and mail users.
There is also the fact that these previews are not the whole story. There might end up being additional talented spells for your spec or revamps of various class abilities that will change your current rotation. Some classes are getting simplified and others will be getting a little more depth.
All in all, please look at these changes with an open mind and leave any preconceived notions at the door. We still have the entire beta for them to tweak and change any of the current ideas that might be lacking or might not mesh well with your class's existing kit.
Always remember to leave constructive feedback (Note: "This sucks!", "Blizzard obviously doesn't play my class," and "Ghostcrawler promised me a pony!" are not examples constructive feedback.) and tell them what parts seem clunky, good, lackluster or just simply feel "off" of what it should be for whatever reason (and always include the reason why). If you're eloquent in your post (and sometimes even if you're not), you might be the voice that gets things changed.
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm will destroy Azeroth as we know it. Nothing will be the same. In WoW.com's Guide to Cataclysm you can find out everything you need to know about WoW's third expansion. From goblins and worgens to mastery and guild changes, it's all there for your cataclysmic enjoyment.Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Cataclysm
Reader Comments (Page 6 of 6)
N-train Apr 12th 2010 4:29PM
Frankly that's the state with most of these changes.
Where people fall into problems is when they apply these new abilities or stats to Wrath as of 3.3.3.
If it's been said once it's been said 1483798726483 times, just about EVERYTHING in Cata is getting an overhaul of some sort, so QQing about Blood tanking dooming DKs or lack of Tree Form dooming resto droods without an actual 4.0 talent chart in front of you is like being convinced a new type of engine won't work in a car when you don't know any real specifics or design details about either.
All we got here was a broad outlook on the names and mechanics of new talents and abilities (notice how the numbers were few and far between, if any), so I'm with you, in most cases there really isn't enough information to make any large conclusions until we see some numbers or better yet, a talent chart, and that's what Beta is for.
Marathal Apr 12th 2010 2:53PM
Having played other games where announcements have been made and people jump to all sorts of conclusions, I have found that every so often mixed in with all of the panic there is the occasional insightful statement. Kind of a How is that going to work if I am in a group with a Shaman and I am using this potion. Every so often the designers have a chance to say Whoops before it gets to far along. So Don't panic, keep the comments constructive and Can't we all just get along?
Jesse Felt Apr 12th 2010 3:15PM
It's too bad that the only people who will read this and pay attention already understand this concept... Really wish these whiners would stop mucking up my blue tracker with their nonsense...
john_hayes Apr 12th 2010 5:05PM
Author, you can't just randomly "pot hole" your prose with links and expect people to know what you are talking about. Don't expect your readers to open up 2 or 3 tabs of links just to follow your narrative. Taking the time to actually craft a fully thoughtful and articulate article that isn't just a veiled "stfu" at wow fans is what it's all about.
Gregg Reece Apr 12th 2010 6:09PM
Actually, the end of the post encourages the readers to actually tell Blizzard how they feel. It just encourages them to do so without insults and flames by putting the reason why after those feelings. I'm not sure how that conveys 'stfu'.
"This sucks!" doesn't provide any useful feedback and actually "This rocks!" doesn't either.
Chris Anthony Apr 12th 2010 6:11PM
Welcome to the internet, son. If you don't want to follow links, there are these things called "books" you should check out. (Watch out for the footnotes, though, they're a doozy.)
Imagene Apr 12th 2010 5:29PM
Trees can't dps in treeform, boomkins can't heal in moonkin form, bears can't moonfire or heal in bear/cat form. It doesn't hold up. The only healing that a shadow priest can do in shadow form is vampiric embrace....what little comes from that. It doesn't hold up at all. And dps as a pally is weak, as well - they're not meant to be a casting class for anything other than heals. Yea, they've started wacking judgements on npcs, which is lovely, but they're not doing it for dps purposes, but for their buff purposes. Resto shaman don't REALLY dps in their form - when you flame shock and see a big 2-3k bomb drop, and then the lava burst popping out for 8k, oh you're happy....so happy. But spec elemental and watch THEM drop a flame shock and that lava burst, and you'll be wondering "WHYYYYYYY???" Why would healing trees be expected to dps. It's not like it's going to benefit us in any way. Healing as a tree is fun, and I'm really not a fan of night elves, it was just my first of a server full of characters. Seeing her bop and bumble around NOT in tree form makes me cring. I stay in form about 99.2% of the time, just to avoid the NE look. (Yea, I'm in a minority, but I love the class and wouldn't have it any other way, really!)
Long story short: I'm not excited about any of this. It feels like it's one of Sony's combat revisions that they pull out their asses and ruin their games. Blizz isn't Sony, but all of these changes - yea. It's totally Sony related. I've got a server full of 80s and two almost 80s so I'm covering almost everything, and none of what I'm reading or seeing is making me happy. wtb vanilla pst. I so miss vanilla - grinding out that last little bit of level 60 in the plaguelands. Sigh. But why tell us not to get down about the changes, when we know the majority of the changes WILL happen. They're not going to give me back my cleansing totem and they're taking away my abolish poison and abolish disease and I'm going to be throwing fog at enemies. Naw. There's plenty that I'm sad about. "O BOI. I GET TO MOVE AND HEAL AT THE SAME TIME!" " O FFS. THAT MAGE BEAT ME TO HEROISM."
sigh.
aerinbear Apr 12th 2010 6:44PM
I'm really concerned about hunters switching to focus. I threw my comments into the ginormous hunter preview thread. No clue if anyone is actually going to ever read those honkin' threads. In a nutshell, I'm happy with the throttle on my abilities being various cooldowns that I have to manage. I'm concerned that changing the throttle to focus regeneration will feel like playing a rogue at range. I've played a rogue, and it's ok, but not nearly as fun as my hunter.
Lots of times playing a rogue, it's felt like I'm just waiting for the energy bar to get to a certain point before I can do something productive. With my hunter, it's more like "hmm, what's the best thing I can do now?". The cooldowns are a limit, but they don't completely shut me down.
I just really hope Blizzard goes to the effort to keep the 2 classes feeling different, rather than one class waits in melee for their bar to fill and one class waits at range. If they can manage the tempo of play, then I'll be ok with the changes. Part of the reason that I'm dubious, though, is the focus costs listed and the fact that the escape options had such high costs. I know that those are early numbers, but still. Just putting focus costs against the defensive abilities tells me that Blizzard isn't thinking this through well.
Gregg Reece Apr 12th 2010 6:47PM
One of the nice things about the focus system is that you can always Steady Shot and that will actually give you focus _back_ so that you can cast other things.
So, with a rogue, they're limited on waiting for energy to come back. Hunters will actually be able to do things to force their focus to come back faster.
It sounds rather neat, but I'm really hoping to see it in action. I might drag my hunter out of mothballs to play around with.
aerinbear Apr 12th 2010 7:08PM
Aye Gregg, I'm hoping it works out well. I just hope that whoever does the tuning is picky. I hope they really ship it "when it's done". That hasn't always been the case.
Sarah Apr 12th 2010 11:02PM
Ghostcrawler promised me new dance moves.
Cure Apr 13th 2010 3:55AM
Well ok I'll try to be civil...
Anyway my major disappointment wasn't so much with new spells and stats so much as with the lack of anything really new. I'm a warlock player and I don't really hate the changes blizzard is given us, its just that I wanted more, a flight mount (or even flight form), a few more demon skins. These aren't things like a spell that seems useless or unbalanced which might still change when the expansion drops.
Sure I know what Blizzard is saying, "if we give you a new demon/skin/mount then we'll have to give you one less random pve mob".
And I can see their reasoning, (extreme happiness) * (warlock player count) < (mild amusement) * (other class player count). Still I wanted my demonic flying pony :P
But I guess there is also the issue of if they give warlock demon new skins then they'd have to give druid new skins (although they already have sort of...) and the paladins will probably also want new mounts as well etc... etc...
Sinthar Apr 13th 2010 11:29AM
Books dont put footnotes in a different volume however. And footnotes CAN be put on web pages. Sorry to shoot your analogy down, but it wasnt a very good one.
Personally i wont click every link thats there, just because i can, and i dont think its TOO much to ask for an article to be complete and readable in itself, without having necesary reading on other web pages.
That said, i have to also say, i found this article easy enough to follow without clicking on the links, and personally i also like that you have got crossreference material for 'further' reading if you have say, been out of touch for a month or so.