Ask the Devs Round 4: Weapons and armor questions answered

There are some interesting questions this time around, as always, and even some more interesting answers. Highlights include the need for more armor models, a cool idea about buying quartermaster outfits, the drop rate of the legendary shards for 10- and 25-man raiding, and an interesting fix to prevent players rolling need on items in the random dungeon finder only to throw them up on the auction house. The full Q&A is after the jump.

Quote:
Q: Is there any chance we could have caster weapons involved in casting animations? It would look cool to be holding a staff and casting a spell through it, at least as a customization option. - Dromanthis (NA/ANZ)
Q: Is there any chance we could have caster weapons involved in casting animations? It would look cool to be holding a staff and casting a spell through it, at least as a customization option. - Dromanthis (NA/ANZ)
A: This is something we would dearly love to do. We agree that melee specs get to see their weapons a lot more often in combat while it's easy for casters to forget about them. It's definitely on the list, but understand that we have so many races now (and two sexes for all existing races) that the animations take more time to do right/well.

Quote:
Q: Would it be possible for city quartermasters to sell the same equipment that guards wear? Stats wouldn't matter. - Pokemonmasta (EU|English), Tajit (NA/ANZ)
Q: Would it be possible for city quartermasters to sell the same equipment that guards wear? Stats wouldn't matter. - Pokemonmasta (EU|English), Tajit (NA/ANZ)
A: Cool idea. We'll talk about it.

Quote:
Q: Are you planning to return to the original principle of designing the Tiers, when the sets were themed with the classes, not with the bosses that drop them? Do you have any plans to make the tier items visually different depending on your spec? - ???? (EU|Russian), Trafalgarlaw (Latin America)
Q: Are you planning to return to the original principle of designing the Tiers, when the sets were themed with the classes, not with the bosses that drop them? Do you have any plans to make the tier items visually different depending on your spec? - ???? (EU|Russian), Trafalgarlaw (Latin America)
A: We try and alternate the themes in order to keep things feeling fresh. Players can get bored if things feel too formulaic. The Firelands raid has a really strong theme, so the tier sets are based on the various creatures that live on the elemental plane: for example, fire spiders for the warlock set. Other tiers don't have as strong a unifying theme so we go back to the classes for that. In the Call of the Crusade patch, we did faction-specific armor to solidify the military feel and Horde vs. Alliance rivalry.
Varying tiers depending on spec is a cool idea, but it does add more work to the individual armor which usually means we'll get less of it. Color shifts are one option, but tend to already use all of those. We have more unique art these days than ever before, but the number of items overall has grown tremendously faster.

Quote:
Q: I like the creative items that are dropped from Icecrown Citadel such as Nibelung, Heartpierce, Deathbringer's Will. Can I see more of such items containing unique proc-effects in the near futuer? - Whitewnd (Korea)
Q: I like the creative items that are dropped from Icecrown Citadel such as Nibelung, Heartpierce, Deathbringer's Will. Can I see more of such items containing unique proc-effects in the near futuer? - Whitewnd (Korea)
A: Yes. We think the procs are a good way from keeping the weapons from just feeling like a predictable bag of stats. There will be more in Firelands.

Quote:
Q: Will enchanters be getting back the ability to make wands? - Trustybee (Taiwan)
Q: Will enchanters be getting back the ability to make wands? - Trustybee (Taiwan)
A: We have been discussing what role in the game wands are supposed to fill. We generally consider it a failure these days if a caster ever wants to wand for dps instead of using their spells. Working the wand into the cast animation (as in the question above) is one idea. In any event, we want to figure out what we want wands to do before we give them any more prominence.

Quote:
Q: Any chance we can start heading away from WWE-esque belts? - Catriona (NA/ANZ)
Q: Any chance we can start heading away from WWE-esque belts? - Catriona (NA/ANZ)
A: Azeroth is stricken by a terrible plague that inflates the size of shoulders and belts over time. Our artists like the belts because they have more room for detail when they're larger. That said, your concern is duly noted.

Quote:
Q: Do you have plans to make is so that the tabards don't suddenly cut off whenever we wear long vestments? - Hôwl (Latin America)
Q: Do you have plans to make is so that the tabards don't suddenly cut off whenever we wear long vestments? - Hôwl (Latin America)
A: This is a technical issue that's fairly nasty to fix and ultimately trimming the tabard ended up looking better, at least as a short-term solution.

Quote:
Q: Can we see gear won via need rolls become soulbound? - Lorinall (NA/ANZ)
Q: Can we see gear won via need rolls become soulbound? - Lorinall (NA/ANZ)
A: Yes. We plan on implementing a system where winning an item via Need (when using the Dungeon Finder Need Before Greed loot system) will make a BoE item soulbound. We hope to have this working for the 4.2 patch.
To expand on that idea in case it's not obvious, we don't think players should be able to claim certain loot drops based on their class if their only intent is to sell the item. If you want to use the item yourself, awesome, go ahead and roll Need on it and you'll get preference over players who can't use that armor type. But if all you want to do is run to the Auction House, then everyone should have equal dibs.

Quote:
Q: How do you plan on normalizing Legendary weapon aquisition rate between 10 man and 25 man raids? If the drop rate is the same for 'shards' in 10 and 25 man raids, this may 'force' 25 man guilds to run 2-3 10 mans in order to maximize shard/legendary aquisition. If the drop rate for 'shards' in 25 man raids was 2.5 times than that in 10 man, it could take a 10 man guild say, 2.5 months to gain a legendary whereas a 25 man guild would take 1 month. - Deathsaint (NA/ANZ)
Q: How do you plan on normalizing Legendary weapon aquisition rate between 10 man and 25 man raids? If the drop rate is the same for 'shards' in 10 and 25 man raids, this may 'force' 25 man guilds to run 2-3 10 mans in order to maximize shard/legendary aquisition. If the drop rate for 'shards' in 25 man raids was 2.5 times than that in 10 man, it could take a 10 man guild say, 2.5 months to gain a legendary whereas a 25 man guild would take 1 month. - Deathsaint (NA/ANZ)
A: Our main goal is to offer the Legendary in both 10 and 25 without requiring say a 25-player raid to feel like they have to switch to running 10s for the sole purpose of Legendary fragment acquisition (and the same is true for 10s). Our plan is to make Legendary completion take longer to acquire in 10-player raids. The exact ratio will be somewhat obfuscated because of the variation in the amount of fragments dropped per boss based on both raid size and raid difficulty. However, you can plan on it being maybe 2 to 2.5 times faster for the 25-player raid. It should feel analogous to number of Valor points or gold dropped in 25s, and is being treated the same.
Without giving too much away, the Firelands legendary weapon has an amazing story and quest chain associated with it. We think it truly delivers on the fantasy of a legendary weapon.

Quote:
Q: I feel that the current item drop ratio per part for caster's is little bit weird. While belt slot items are very common, wrist and ranged (wand) item are drastically rare. Now players don't like going to Throne of the Four Winds because belt and pants are so easily acquired via other way. What if the drops of Throne of the Four Winds changed into rare slot items, such as wrist and wand? - ?????? (Korea)
Q: I feel that the current item drop ratio per part for caster's is little bit weird. While belt slot items are very common, wrist and ranged (wand) item are drastically rare. Now players don't like going to Throne of the Four Winds because belt and pants are so easily acquired via other way. What if the drops of Throne of the Four Winds changed into rare slot items, such as wrist and wand? - ?????? (Korea)
A: There are a few issues embedded in this question. One is that while we like the random nature of the Throne of the Four Winds gear overall, it occupies a strange niche in the current itemization scheme. Al'Akir for example is fairly challenging, but so are Cho'gall and Nefarian. The net result is that many players lack epic legs, heads or shoulders and so have a strong incentive to spend Valor Point on their tier set of legs. By the time they defeat Al'Akir, nobody wants his legs. We plan on tweaking those loot tables a little for 4.1; Al'Akir will drop some random necks and cloaks as well as helm or shoulder tokens in addition or in some cases instead of his current loot.
As far as some items being rarer than others, that is the kind of thing we vary so that every tier of content doesn't feel like a photocopy of the previous tier with bigger numbers. Our PvP gear for a variety of reasons has become very formulaic, and we don't want the same thing to befall PvE. Bracers are hard to get now (though the trolls in 4.1 have a lot!), but next tier it might be a different item that becomes precious.

Quote:
Q: What are the criteria you use to design the loots in a certain dungeon/ raid? Is it the backgrounds of the encounters, the preference of the designers, or basing on the existing models? - Kiolds (Taiwan)
Q: What are the criteria you use to design the loots in a certain dungeon/ raid? Is it the backgrounds of the encounters, the preference of the designers, or basing on the existing models? - Kiolds (Taiwan)
A: All of that and more. As in the question above, if the dungeon or raid has a really strong visual kit, then we definitely jump on that. When you consider say the Cataclysm dungeon tier, there was a really diverse set of environments with no strong unifying theme. We could have tried to plan ahead of time that say Corborus would drop a certain weapon so we should theme it like a ring worm. That kind of rigid planning though doesn't allow us a lot of room to maneuver if we decide to add a boss, change the source of certain items or so on. Naming the items can come from a variety of sources. Sometimes we play off of the boss (Symbiotic Worm from Magmaw), but there are pop-culture references (License to Slay), inside jokes (Chestplate of Hubris), and words that just sounded appealing together (Battleplate of the Apocalypse).

Quote:
Q: Is there any plan to allow Account Bound items to be transfer to other realms? This could really give meaning to the phrase "Account Bound". - ?????? (Korea), ??????? (EU|Russian), Åtchøûm (EU|French), Tellua (NA/ANZ)
Q: Is there any plan to allow Account Bound items to be transfer to other realms? This could really give meaning to the phrase "Account Bound". - ?????? (Korea), ??????? (EU|Russian), Åtchøûm (EU|French), Tellua (NA/ANZ)
A: Yes. Some day. It will take a lot of programmer time to implement, but it's something we want to do.

Quote:
Q: Is it possible to let the players create/edit their own looks? - Zed Loft (Taiwan), Vysha (NA/ANZ), Ráchel (EU|German)
Q: Is it possible to let the players create/edit their own looks? - Zed Loft (Taiwan), Vysha (NA/ANZ), Ráchel (EU|German)
A: As we said in an earlier Q&A, we definitely hear loud and clear from players that they want more customization for their character. This is something we want to provide, but we want to do it in the right way. Consider the Barber Shop feature. It lets you change your character's hair, but there's not a lot of gameplay to it. We're not sure that feature really added a lot to the game in retrospect. Is WoW more fun for you now that you have a Barber Shop? Are you more likely to keep playing because of it? Maybe, but it wasn't a cheap feature to add in terms of development time. Dumping a bunch of dyes on the game might have a similar effect, where some players might have fun playing around with the system for a bit, but a lot of players might change their colors once or twice and then forget about the feature after that. Now, not every aspect of the game needs a ton of depth and a lot of interesting decisions, but we tend to attract more players to a feature the more robust the feature is.
We also think it's fair to argue that the game just needs more armor and weapon art. As we said above, we deliver a lot of art these days, but we also produce an enormous number of new items every expansion or patch and it's understandably disappointing whenever items use the same art. It would be really cool if not every mage or priest converged on the same look after a given expansion or patch.
Blizzard seems to be on a much sturdier footing when it comes to weapon and armor design and implementation than some of the other subjects in previous question-and-answer settings. There is a clear way forward dealing with gear, and the hopeful aspects of "more, more, more" have me pretty excited for Firelands.
On the gear sets, I am excited that they are going to be modeled after the creatures from the Firelands for the next raid tier. ICC's sets were really great and were modeled after the denizens of Icecrown, and Firelands should not disappoint. Also, players in 25-man raids have the added benefit of gaining the legendary tier weapon faster than 10-mans, but this has been the stated trade-off between the two from the beginnings of the new design. 25-man raids are given access to faster gear, while 10-man raids are easier to put together in terms of attendance but still reward the same gear. It should not come to anyone's surprise that the legendary would be faster to pick up in 25-man raids.
As for BoE items becoming soulbound with a need roll in the random dungeon finder, Blizzard is right on the money -- no class should have a monopoly on items like that. Sure, people will still roll need despite never really needing the item and sending it off to the vendor for vendor price, but this might make things a bit more fair when it comes to auction house play in the game itself, especially with 359 epic world drops.
Check out our coverage of the previous Ask the Devs Q&A sessions:
- Ask the Devs Round 1: Questions and Answers
- Ask the Devs Round 2: PvP
- Ask the Devs Round 3: UI and macros
WoW Patch 4.1 is on the PTR, and WoW Insider has all the latest news for you -- from previews of the revamped Zul'Aman and Zul'Gurub to new valor point mechanics and new archaeology items.
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 2 of 5)
Toast Apr 5th 2011 4:39PM
In PvP, I can tell when a player is wearing full vicious or bloodthirsty or if they're even in PvE gear.
It definitely plays a role on who I attack first. ;)
thpthpthp1 Apr 5th 2011 4:42PM
Personally as much as I'd love this feature I do think we'd have the problem of every person looking the same, for example every other Paladin would want to look like they're in full Judgement, all the Warlocks would be in.. Well atleast every Lock set looks badass.
Atleast it'd give a reason to run old content though.
jealouspirate Apr 5th 2011 4:46PM
Honestly, I think that reason is a lie. In WPvP and Battlegrounds items that completely transform your character are permissable and easily acquired.
Not to mention that they could restrict it so only your faction (or you) sees your 'vanity set'. Remember the old bug that made you appear as any race you wanted, but only to you? The tech seems to be there, at least in some form.
BadAndyMk3 Apr 5th 2011 4:51PM
Sumadin-
A agree with you there, but , you get to the point where everyone is wearing nearly the exact same thing as everyone in their clas sor even armor type.
And while the devs do put a lot of time into makeing tier sets look good, they also put a lot of time into making armor sets that match or just happen to look good together. Why not let us show off some of that stuff?
DarkWalker Apr 5th 2011 10:11PM
Sincerely, I think the whole silhouette thing very nice in PvE when applied to mobs, but harmful for PvP. I see being forced to guess an opponent's capabilities as a very good thing in PvP; it adds a kind of uncertainty that seems sorely lacking in WoW's organized PvP.
And I sincerely think more uncertainty would make World PvP much better. Make gankers have to wonder if their target is a careless player in PvE gear or someone in full PvP gear ready for the action.
Allowing players to choose how their gear look should break the monotony of garb in the game. And even if almost everyone decided to dress identically (which I truly doubt would happen, from playing a couple games with appearance tabs), it would not matter to me, as long as I could dress differently. My reason for liking games with appearance tabs is not due to other players sporting a variety of garbs (though that happens too), but due to the fact I can look the way I want.
(BTW, I almost never like the appearance of high end gear. Too showy at best, blasted ugly at worst. Where I can, I create a unique garb out of parts of gearing gear.)
For me, the second best PvP "feature" of DCUO is the fact the player set their character appearance any way he wants from the gear pieces he owns. He can keep his lv1 look all the way to max level and maxed out PvP set.
I.e., if you go against someone that appears to be using the best PvP gear, you can be sure he is wearing it; but if you go against someone that appears to be wearing any other gear, you need to guess what kind of gear he is using. He could be in full PvE quest greens, or he could be in the best PvP gear, and you will often be unable to tell before combat starts. Taking the measure of your opponents during combat, to see who you need to focus, is part of the game.
If anyone is wondering, for me the best PvP feature of DCUO is the paper-scissors-rock nature of PvP combat; any move has a countermove, and the last patch made the countermove hit with the stats of the countered player, so a max level player being countered by a lv5 one will be hit as if another max level player had attacked. Bad PvPers could already be beaten by good lowbies, now it has become even easier; in DCUO, skill was already more important than gear or level, now it's more so :)
mjsheldon Apr 6th 2011 12:14PM
I cant imagine that spotting opponent gear level is the main reason for the gear uniformity. Blizzard has often said you have to make a development choice on where your priority is and they choose less customization and more content. Besides they allow druids to run the pvp field in a uniform appearance, you cant spot the gear level on a kitty.
Vrykerion Apr 6th 2011 1:02PM
Gear appearance has to reflect power because if it doesn't we end up with this:
"Vegeta, what does the scouter say about his item level?"
"It's -"
No. Not doing. Won't say it. Nuh uh. But you get the point.
Shrikesnest Apr 6th 2011 6:38PM
Anybody else notice that no matter what ideas are proposed about appearance, there is a contingent of doom prophets who believe that finally, at long last, everyone in WoW will look identical? No matter what. Tier sets are going to make everyone look the same, and so are the more visually unified quest rewards from low-level areas in Cata, and the barbershop is going to make everyone walk around with the same hairdo, etc. Do people really think there's so little variance of opinion between twelve million people that the vast majority of them are all going to make the exact same stylistic choices?
thebitterfig Apr 9th 2011 11:19PM
I've known folks who, for PvP reasons, always bought the shoulders first for their PvP set, since those are the most visible piece of gear. Give someone on the battlefield that they'll be harder to kill and better equipped than you might be, for intimidation reasons.
Yeah, I think they're nuts too.
Hollow Leviathan Apr 5th 2011 4:18PM
I wish they'd just make an entirely new engine for the game that scales better to lower system specs, looks better, and handles clipping better than the current one before they made staff casting animations.
Parts of the game looks like Unreal Tournament 1, but has the system specs of Unreal Tournament 3. I know Half-Life 2, among other games, looks better but works better on older computers. Blizzard is a huge company, this kind of slapdash technology frustrates me as a player.
jealouspirate Apr 5th 2011 4:49PM
I'd like to think that I'm usually pretty forgiving with graphics, but the player models have so much clipping it drives me crazy. It really isn't doing WoW any favours.
Drakkenfyre Apr 5th 2011 6:41PM
So you want them to take an additional 4-5 years, and make a new
engine?
Part of the specs problem isn't optimization. It's the fact that it's
an MMORPG. You are dealing with potentially hundreds of different
people in different gear around you at once that it has to render.
Despite the gear not being photorealistic as in some other games, it's
still taxing.
The add in the realtime shadows (which essentially copy the player
model, and flatten them against the ground) and the water effects with
reflections.
You are also dealing with open environments. The game constantly loads in the background, so you rarely get a loading screen. A game like Half-Life 2 loads up the entire stage or most of it, into RAM all at once. Comparing the performance of a single-player game to an MMORPG is ridiculous.
Half-Life 2 loads up only a few models which are duplicated per stage. No enemy is different from any other of it's type. A Combine soldier looks like any other Combine soldier. A Headcrab looks like any other Headcrab of it's type. The game does not have to contend with hundreds of other, unique people around you all the time.
The Source engine is also been worked on for a long time. It started out as the Quake engine, then was heavily modified for Half-Life, and that version of the engine was named the GoldSrc engine, then that was upgraded to be the Source engine. So there are parts of the engine which date back to 1995. There are plenty of optimizations in the engine.
As for the look, Unreal Tournament tried realistic graphics with the limitations of the time. WoW is designed to look the way it does. It follows the style of WarCraft 3, and all previous WarCraft games before it. So to say "Half-Life 2 looks better, and runs better on older hardware" kind of misses the point a little bit.
Hollow Leviathan Apr 5th 2011 7:08PM
Most of those complaints are RAM-based, and yes, I understand that a game with a lot more unique models would take longer to load and require more memory. What doesn't compute is the GPU-based issues, like particle effects and render speed (assuming no RAM loading bottleneck). WoW definitely does not do this nearly as well as it could. I've seen people unable to raid with decent computers because the ground effects on Sindragosa were beyond the ability of their computer to render in real-time. It wasn't really their computer at fault, it was a primitive game engine that is holding Warcraft back.
It's not even a bad financial decision, because WoW is losing the portion of the MMO/gaming community that are drawn in by sharp visuals. I'm not hating on the stylized graphics of the game, it's a great art direction, but there's no reason for 2 triangle mouths from the N64 era and blurry low-res textures next to sharp worgen/goblin models. LEGO characters in that MMO have more polygons than WoW players in full armor.
Drakkenfyre Apr 5th 2011 8:39PM
I agree some of the textures need to be higher resolution. They are making steps in that direction. The textures of SW were completely upgraded when it was redone. It would be nice if they had super high resolution textures, while staying in the art style, with a warning of "This is for video cards with high amounts of video RAM only" on the option.
And to be perfectly honest, they are trying to replicate something that is perfectly round in the LEGO MMO. I would expect them to use more polygons. But yes, some things do need to be replaced. The mouths on some races are one, as you said.
Hollow Leviathan Apr 5th 2011 8:28PM
Also, the Source engine was a fork of the GoldSrc engine starting a few weeks before Half-Life shipped, so late 1998, whereas the World of Warcraft engine is a fork of the Warcraft III engine, which started development in early 1998 (probably forked in 99/00). They were both commercially released as their modern iteration in Nov 2004, and continuously upgraded since then to handle all sorts of environments, effects and models. I think comparing them is actually fairly apt.
The major difference in use is, as you said, the often increased demands on live loading of objects into RAM as you explore WoW.. If that was the only point of divergence for performance and visual quality between the two engines, I would be quite happy.
Drakkenfyre Apr 5th 2011 8:49PM
Half-Life one was written using the Quake engine, at the end it was about 70% new code. The names GoldSrc and Source come from the fact that the folders used for their engine code, one was named "Gold Source" for the code which was going to be in the gold master, and one named "Source" for new, unproven code. Whatever changes they made after the shipped version, went into the "Source" folder. They used the "Source engine" to talk about that code internally, and at a gaming convention, someone asked them about the engine name. They said "Source" without thinking about it. The gaming press reported the name. So they decided they would officially name it the "Source engine", as they liked the name. So yes, even tho it was fork, it was directly based on the GoldSrc engine, it's exactly like the Unreal Engine. It's been built upon over and over again. The current engine is just an upgraded version of Unreal Engine 2, which was an upgraded version of the previous one, and so forth.
WoW is not based on the WarCraft 3 engine. This is a common misconception. It started when in an interview, they said "We started using the WarCraft 3 engine, but when we found out it couldn't do exactly what we wanted, we went back and created one from scratch."
matticus Apr 5th 2011 4:27PM
Where was the soulbound on need rolls during the battered hilt days? I lost several of those while trying to tank that instance with a damn 219 staff....
Bapo Apr 5th 2011 4:43PM
While I like the idea of the "If you need it, it will become Soulbound" to BoE's, but at the same time, it means there's a huge chance it will just get sharded, when it could get AH'd for more than the shard is worth. (Yes I know, depending on the item, the crystal can go towards an enchant that is worth more)
It's kinda like when people run ICC, and people will shard the item, for something they throw in the gbank, rather than just vendoring the item for 30ish or so gold.
Valekai Apr 5th 2011 5:16PM
but they are saying if someone clicks need it soulbinds, if everyone hits greed like they should if they all want to sell it, it wouldn't become bound.
Lorini Apr 5th 2011 6:57PM
It could only get sharded if the person who rolls Need is an enchanter. What would be nice is if dungeon loot didn't have a high vendor price, particularly raid loot. You're not in there to find stuff to vendor anyway.