Skip to Content
11-24-2010 @ 3:56PM
I think Social has the right idea, and maybe (hopefully even) this hints at a future direction that they'll go.Meta reqs are good, but only so far as the cost/benefit is desirable. As people have pointed out, giving up most of your gem slots to something other than your most desirable stat for a 3% crit chance increase makes the decision easy for many specs: don't do it. That is poor design, imo.Blizz has been revamping the talent trees to avoid this exact situation. When one choice is such a significant benefit that only the ignorant (as well as the obstinant or outright dumb) would choose the alternative, then there really isn't a choice.If they were to increase the value of a meta to the point that there were a theoretical disparity within the margin of error between having/gemming for the powerful meta and having a weaker meta/gemming your best stat, THEN players would have real choice. That would be good design, imo.
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.