Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
5-08-2010 @ 11:19PM
Scard said...
Here's my question for Blizz developers regarding PvE and frost.
Blizz has made it very clear that, come Cataclysm, Blood will be the DK tanking spec. If you want to tank as a DK in a progression raid in Cata, you will need to be Blood. They have made their intentions very clear.
Now what does this have to do with mages?
Why hasn't Blizz said a similar thing for mages? Just come out and say what we all know. Frost is the mage PvP spec. Arcane and Fire and FFB (if that will even be an option come Cata) are the PvE specs. If you want to put out strong DPS numbers in a progression raid in Cata, you will need to spec Arcane or Fire.
Now don't get me wrong, I love frost. I too, would love to raid as frost as it was my first love. But it's time to draw the line in the sand that we all know is there. Just come out and say it Blizz. Please.
Reply
5-09-2010 @ 12:38AM
Bronwyn said...
Because it would be silly to liken a role in the game (tank/dps/healer) to a style of ply (pvp vs. pve). It's not the same thing, and I daresay it would be even more frustrating for everyone (Blizzard included) if they started further pigeonholing specs on pure dps classes into the pvp/pve standpoint and trying to balance it that way.
5-09-2010 @ 5:29AM
Lemons said...
@Bronwyn
How would it be more frusterating to separate specs? The frusteration comes from trying to find a way make a spec that does decent damage in the pve, and also make sure that spec doesn't completely destroy people in the pvp game. I'm not advocating separating specs in this manner, but I'm not ignorant enough to believe it wouldn't be easier to balance.