Skip to Content
10-14-2010 @ 3:05PM
" I am reluctant to mention additional classes or specs that we are looking at currently for fear of instilling excitement or panic. "No kidding xD Don't worry, GC, we trust you!
10-14-2010 @ 3:14PM
LOL... I was about to use the same quote!GC just doesn't want to see the forums implode.
10-14-2010 @ 3:27PM
Do we, though?Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to start a lets-flame-GCer rageathon, but wasn't he responsible for overseeing these changes going in in the first place? People have been saying for a very long time "it's hard to say how it'll actually play since the numbers aren't fixed yet" - but I guess it turns out that they were, and now they're going to have to do a rush job on a fix (aside from whether or not you feel the initial 4.0.1 changes were rushed or not, the last set of changes just got put in overnight, there's no way that went through a thorough test cycle...)Again, the last thing we need to do is all nerdrage at Ghostcrawler, but it's not like it's the first time a class or spec has wound up working poorly despite extensive test time.
10-14-2010 @ 3:59PM
@KolyarutI think I have to agree with you here. If the numbers are balanced at 85 and imbalanced at 80 (and by imbalanced I mean GROTESQUELY imbalanced), who knows what other levels are imbalanced? What about a level 30 mage vs a 30 ret pally? And who says that these lower levels are not important? It affects:1. Lower level BG brackets2. People's perception at early levels that mage is OP and ret pally is weak, which may lead people to abandon their lowbie alts early on.With Blizzard's focus on 1-60 leveling experience, balancing numbers only at 85 seems very contradictory with their general philosophy in Cata. If it's only balanced at one level, then something is seriously wrong with either their scaling formula, combat rating formula, or something else... basically, GC, double check your math please.
10-14-2010 @ 4:07PM
blues have already said that the issues we're seeing here and now were not evident on the PTR.So checking math is something they had already done, but when the changes went live on the live servers, it didn't work right.They are doing the best they can.
10-14-2010 @ 4:17PM
@niko Bullcrap. I know for certain issues that were reported and posted and folks just yelled them down with calls of "It's beta/ptr don't worry, it'll be fixed before it's live" and now it's live with the same issues. I've seen too many times where something that didn't get fixed early stayed that way throughout an expansion. Blizz seems loath to fix an issue if it's not what they consider "Game-breaking", even if it pushes a spec way down in PvE or Arena. They put them off or ignore them until a big content patch like this. So if you don't make sure Blizz knows about the amount of displeasure with a certain bug, you end up stuck with it until the next go-round.
10-14-2010 @ 4:26PM
Trilynne - if this stuff wasn't evident on the PTR, then they're really wasting time and money running the server in the first place. Did anybody spend more than ten minutes playing on patch day without running across a half a dozen severely broken mechanics and numbers?People have been reporting for months that the numbers on all the spells were severely broken, but it would all be ironed out before release. Blizzard would have had to have their heads buried so deep in the sand they could see China if they weren't prepped for this possibility (maybe they were, which is why they were able to turn around phase 1 of fixes so fast, but I doubt that's the case really).Maybe they are doing the best they can, but you'd expect the leading subscription MMO in the west to be able to manage better, really - especially since half the ratings changes, the rage changes and the DK spec changes were all made with the express purpose of making them easier to balance.Again, to balance the QQ - there are plenty of patch elements which I think are quite nice, such as mob tracking, being able to see party member quest completions with the default UI, the new talent tree bonuses, will all be great once they've fixed the numbers. They just could have held the good stuff back until they were ready with the gameplay itself.
10-14-2010 @ 4:27PM
Crap it - that was meant for Niko's reply, not Trilynne's original comment. I cannot get my head around this comment system.
10-14-2010 @ 4:57PM
Kolyarut: haha, I was going to say, I'm just enjoying all the responses my tiny little comment got, not participating in the discussion. :P The only bug that's bothering me atm is how hunter pets don't sustain their attacks underwater for some weird reason. *shrugs*
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.