Patch 4.2 class balance explained

Personally, I think Ghostcrawler going out of his way to do this is extremely cool. Even if you disagree with the calls Blizzard made, it means that players are on a level playing field for opening discussion about those disagreements. We went many years where players could not adequately discuss class changes with the developers in any meaningful way because we didn't necessarily know why those changes were being made. Ghostcrawler, I salute your ongoing efforts to keep the players informed.
Mr. Street's full blog post can be found behind the break below.
Explanation of 4.2 Balance Changes
We understand that raw patch notes don't always provide enough context for changes to the game, so we thought we'd take a moment to explain some of our logic behind the buffs and nerfs coming in the 4.2 "Rage of the Firelands" patch. We particularly want to try to combat the perception that classes end up nerfed in PvE as collateral damage from PvP nerfs (or vice versa). The number of PvP buffs versus PvP nerfs were about equal this time around, and we make careful consideration to keep the impact outside of PvP minimal. So, if we nerfed your class's PvE damage, it's most likely because we thought your class was doing too much damage in PvE.
No doubt you'll disagree with some of our logic -- "But we were middle of the pack!" seems to be the common rebuttal these days. Balance is an art, though, not a science. (This topic probably deserves its own blog, but I'll try to spell it out briefly.)
Balancing a Battleship
Player feedback certainly plays a role in our deciding to make balance changes, but it's just one small part. (And remember that our public forums are not the only place where players voice their opinions.) We also do a lot of internal testing, both simulations and actual character performance, and we collect a lot of external data, which needs to include players at a wide variety of skill levels.
If a class is performing poorly except in the hands of one percent of the population, that's a problem, but it's not an excuse for that class to be overpowered when played by that one percent, especially in PvP. In PvP, your group composition (whether your whole Arena team or just the participants in a given fight in a Battleground) matters enormously. In PvE, the encounter specifics matter enormously (and we're about to get a new cast of characters in Firelands). As a result, it can be challenging to decide which numbers are the right numbers. It doesn't make sense to balance PvE damage solely around Patchwerk-style target dummies and assume everything else is a gimmick. Likewise it doesn't make sense to buff and nerf for each individual encounter. (Say a boss buffs casters -- do you then nerf casters as a consequence?)
Also realize that we don't believe in the existence of any single thermometer for estimating character performance. By that I mean there is no single relatively-accurate measurement of real and true DPS (or tanking, or healing) upon which most players agree. Everything from simulations to target dummy DPS to Arena comp percentages to the top 100 raid parses all count as pieces of the puzzle, and you really have to consider the totality of all of that information in the proper context.
Resto druids "win" healing meters now in part because their raid cooldown, Tranquility, shows up as healing. Warriors do well on Chimaeron because they take a lot of raid damage. Resto shaman heal well on Chimaeron because everyone is wounded all the time.) Yet once you start eliminating data -- "oh that's a gimmick fight" or "oh, someone is inflating their meters by attacking an irrelevant target" -- you risk skewing the results.
Statistics is a complex business. That doesn't mean all of this stuff is inherently unknowable and nobody should bother. It just means you have to be careful; the discussions about these topics are never short and simple. It's wise to be skeptical when anyone attempts to boil down conclusions on class balance to very simple declarations.
Simple Declarations
Having said that, we have a lot of ground to cover below, so some of these notes are going to be very terse by necessity. My apologies in advance.
General
Greg "Ghostcrawler" Street is the lead systems designer for World of Warcraft. He successfully resisted the urge to bore the other designers with tales of obscure marine fauna for Vashj'ir, though he did suggest the pogonophorans.
No doubt you'll disagree with some of our logic -- "But we were middle of the pack!" seems to be the common rebuttal these days. Balance is an art, though, not a science. (This topic probably deserves its own blog, but I'll try to spell it out briefly.)
Balancing a Battleship
Player feedback certainly plays a role in our deciding to make balance changes, but it's just one small part. (And remember that our public forums are not the only place where players voice their opinions.) We also do a lot of internal testing, both simulations and actual character performance, and we collect a lot of external data, which needs to include players at a wide variety of skill levels.
If a class is performing poorly except in the hands of one percent of the population, that's a problem, but it's not an excuse for that class to be overpowered when played by that one percent, especially in PvP. In PvP, your group composition (whether your whole Arena team or just the participants in a given fight in a Battleground) matters enormously. In PvE, the encounter specifics matter enormously (and we're about to get a new cast of characters in Firelands). As a result, it can be challenging to decide which numbers are the right numbers. It doesn't make sense to balance PvE damage solely around Patchwerk-style target dummies and assume everything else is a gimmick. Likewise it doesn't make sense to buff and nerf for each individual encounter. (Say a boss buffs casters -- do you then nerf casters as a consequence?)
Also realize that we don't believe in the existence of any single thermometer for estimating character performance. By that I mean there is no single relatively-accurate measurement of real and true DPS (or tanking, or healing) upon which most players agree. Everything from simulations to target dummy DPS to Arena comp percentages to the top 100 raid parses all count as pieces of the puzzle, and you really have to consider the totality of all of that information in the proper context.
Resto druids "win" healing meters now in part because their raid cooldown, Tranquility, shows up as healing. Warriors do well on Chimaeron because they take a lot of raid damage. Resto shaman heal well on Chimaeron because everyone is wounded all the time.) Yet once you start eliminating data -- "oh that's a gimmick fight" or "oh, someone is inflating their meters by attacking an irrelevant target" -- you risk skewing the results.
Statistics is a complex business. That doesn't mean all of this stuff is inherently unknowable and nobody should bother. It just means you have to be careful; the discussions about these topics are never short and simple. It's wise to be skeptical when anyone attempts to boil down conclusions on class balance to very simple declarations.
Simple Declarations
Having said that, we have a lot of ground to cover below, so some of these notes are going to be very terse by necessity. My apologies in advance.
General
- We changed the way interrupts interact with spell schools. Our intent when we created dual school spells (like Mind Spike being Frost and Shadow) was to allow players locked out of one school to still have something to cast, and we now have the technology to deliver on that design. However, we maintained the rule that being interrupted while casting a dual-school spell will lock you out of both schools because we didn't want players to only use those spells as a way of avoiding interruption.
- We changed all heals to have 200% crits because we wanted to make crit a more attractive stat to healers. Anything random is already at a disadvantage when viewed by a healer, and one point of haste just flat out increased throughput more than a point of crit.
- We removed the threat caused by buffs or crowd control because we wanted to make communication and coordination easier in dungeons, especially among strangers using Dungeon Finder. We want the challenge of a dungeon encounter to be the encounter mechanics, not marking targets. We also think this change will be a quality of life improvement for tanks, who inherited a lot of the responsibility for explaining fights, marking targets and otherwise setting the pace.
- We changed the values of Agility for plate-wearers and Strength for leather-wearers to reinforce which type of armor you should be using and so we wouldn't have to spend diminishing returns trying to balance tanks wearing non-traditional armor sets.
- We added the cast time to Hungering Cold for PvP reasons. It is one of the most powerful forms of crowd control in the game, especially in Battlegrounds, and yet was impossible to prevent.
- The nerfs to Obliterate and Howling Blast were made because Frost damage was too high in both PvP and PvE. Note that these values were hotfixed -- you shouldn't see damage drop further when 4.2 goes live.
- The Glyph of Dark Succor change was to keep Death Strike from providing so much healing in PvP.
- The Might of the Frozen Wastes change was a small tweak to help keep one-handed Frost relatively competitive with two-handed style.
- The Unholy Might buff was to help catch Unholy up to Frost in PvE. Interestingly, we didn't nerf Unholy damage at all in 4.1, but you can still see a small drop in their DPS because so many talented DKs went Frost. I'd love to have the discussion some time about how close two similar specs need to be before players will play the one that is most fun for them and not the one that does theoretical higher damage. Is it 5%? 1%? 0%?
- We boosted Feral damage to compensate for their losing the attack power from Strength. Net DPS shouldn't change much overall, though burst may be slightly higher. (We didn't want to buff bleeds since that was a problem before in PvP.)
- We cut back on the power of Innervates from Feral and Balance druids because we felt they were contributing to too much healer mana.
- We changed several Balance druid mechanics to cut down on the damage they could do while moving in both PvP and PvE and to cut back on some of their strength in multi-dot fights in PvE. Furthermore, we felt like druids were spending too much time at one end or the other of the Eclipse bar by using dots rather than moving the bar back and forth as intended.
- We toned down bear damage, because they were going to do more DPS than other tanks while tanking. Other changes were made to keep bears from neglecting certain core abilities.
- We redesigned Restoration's mastery because it was devalued in situations where druids did a lot of raid healing by HoT-ing different targets, especially in 25-player raids.
- Multi-Shot was doing too much damage in PvE given how simple it was to use.
- Careful Aim allowed Marskman hunters to do too much damage in PvE raiding, where the 80% health phase could last for a long stretch of time.
- However, the Careful Aim nerf also affected Survival, whose DPS was fine or even a little low, so we buffed Black Arrow to compensate.
- We nerfed Arcane Blast because Arcane's damage was too high in PvE. We wanted Arcane to be competitive with Fire, especially given that Fire tends to perform better on fights with movement or multiple targets. However, it looked like many Fire mages were begrudgingly respeccing to Arcane, which wasn't the intent. We wanted Arcane to be competitive, not the only serious mage spec for PvE. (See Frost vs. Unholy note above.)
- We originally tried nerfing Spellsteal's cooldown, but that made it feel really random (for both sides) since the mage had no control over which spell was stolen. We instead nerfed the mana cost to encourage tactical use of Spellsteal and discourage spamming. We'd still like to try a model where dispels have a long cooldown but remove everything, but that is too big a change for now.
- We added the diminishing returns to Deep Freeze and Ring of Frost (after earlier trying some different nerfs) to tone down Frost mage control, especially in the mid and lower tiers of PvP when dispels can't be assured.
- We concluded PvE Holy paladins were ending fights with too much mana relative to other healers, so we raised the mana cost of their single-target heals.
- We tweaked Holy Light because we wanted it to compete a little more with Divine Light, especially when used with Beacon of Light.
- We buffed Word of Glory for three reasons: We felt Holy Power was mattering less to Holy paladins than it did at Cataclysm launch. We wanted to provide more uninterruptible healing in PvP. We knew Light of Dawn was trumping Word of Glory in almost all cases in 25-player raids.
- We changed the Denounce mechanic to give Holy paladins slightly more offensive utility in PvP. We felt that ignoring the other healing classes came at some risk which was not the case for paladins.
- We buffed Holy Radiance both to help PvE paladins feel like they could make larger contributions to raid healing (especially in light of the single-target nerfs) but also as part of a significant buff to Speed of Light to let Holy paladins have more mobility in PvP.
- We made a tweak to Holy's mastery to allow its bubble to stack, so it would be wasted less often when healing a single target.
- We made Selfless Healer, Divine Protection, and Beacon of Light no longer dispellable so that paladins didn't lose so much of their survivability in PvP to dispels. (At no point in this patch was Avenging Wrath undispellable -- that was a myth.)
- We redesigned Holy Shield, partially because paladin mitigation was going to be too good in the Firelands raid, but also because many paladins (though of course not all) told us they wanted a more dynamic rotation and less passive mitigation.
- We buffed Seal of Righteousness to let Retribution use it for AE fights as intended, and also to buff Ret AE damage overall.
- We made a slight buff to Selfless Healer. While we thought the old model was unbalanced and turned Ret into too much of a healing spec, we heard from a lot of players who liked the utility of being able to help heal somewhat. This talent should provide that trade-off in a more balanced way.
- Shadow was doing too much DPS in PvE when multiple DoTs was favored, so we nerfed their DoT damage. We want Shadow to benefit from multi-DoTs, but Shadow's damage was just too high under those conditions. We buffed Shadow cast-time spells to compensate.
- We changed the facing requirement of Psychic Horror as a PvP quality of life change to make it consistent with other non-projectile crowd control spells.
- We nerfed Cloak of Shadows because it felt like Subtlety rogues could counter both casters and melee specs too easily. This change forces them to choose between Cloak of Shadows and Combat Readiness.
- However, we wanted to compensate rogues for this PvP nerf, and we concluded rogue damage in PvE was also too low, so we buffed their damage overall.
- The buff to Hemorrhage was designed to make it less punishing when it wasn't possible to get behind a target, which often arises in PvP but also sometimes in PvE.
- We previously nerfed Water Shield via hotfix because shaman were gaining too much mana in PvP when attacked (especially by pets to discourage drinking). The 4.2 change is just a more elegant implementation of the same nerf that should keep the same mana per time as they have currently.
- We recognized Fire Nova had some usability issues so we increased its throughput and added the Flame Shock refresh mechanic to help ease some of the inconvenience. This is a new mechanic and one we are still evaluating.
- We introduced the Glyph of Unleashed Lightning to help shaman feel less punished by movement in both PvP and PvE. The impact of changes like this are very difficult to model.
- We nerfed Mana Tide for the same reason we nerfed Innervate -- it was just providing too much mana for the group's healers as a whole. We didn't want to decrease the benefit to the shaman, so we redesigned / added the talent of Resurgence to help offset the nerf to them personally.
- We nerfed the Glyph of Soul Swap to reduce the ease of applying multiple DoTs in PvP.
- We nerfed Drain Life because Affliction was forsaking Shadowbolt in PvE, which wasn't intended. We want Drain Life to be for utility, not primarily for damage, and we want all casters to have to hard cast at least some of the time. This was done via hotfix and players won't see a change in 4.2.
- We put Deadly Calm and Recklessness on the same cooldown to reduce warrior burst in PvP.
- We also nerfed Arms and Fury damage across the board because they were doing too much damage in both PvP and PvE. While we are sensitive to casters outperforming melee on several raid encounters, having warriors handily outperform all other melee isn't the solution to that problem.
- The stance requirement changes on long cooldowns was a quality of life change.
- We didn't want warriors using Charge as a rotational ability on some fights without actually having to move (which was a bug created as a result of a fix put in to help hunter problems with minimum range).
- As discussed previously, now that players who have spent a lot of time in Throne of the Four Winds, Blackwing Descent, and Bastion of Twilight are moving on to Firelands, we wanted to make sure players who previously couldn't progress on those raids are now able to experience them. In a way, this provides new content for everyone -- if you're done with the 4.0 raids, you now have 4.2. If you haven't seen the 4.0 raids yet, now's your chance.
Greg "Ghostcrawler" Street is the lead systems designer for World of Warcraft. He successfully resisted the urge to bore the other designers with tales of obscure marine fauna for Vashj'ir, though he did suggest the pogonophorans.
The news is already rolling out for the upcoming WoW Patch 4.2! Preview the new Firelands raid, marvel at the new legendary staff, and get the inside scoop on new quest hubs -- plus new Tier 12 armor!Filed under: News 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 3 of 7)
MusedMoose Jun 16th 2011 10:21PM
Saying "even if you disagree with the call Blizzard made" can refer to any individual nerf or buff, or on a group of them - disagreeing with Blizzard's call (singular) on adjusting how much benefit various classes get from stats on armor.
The "it" refers to what Ghostcrawler is doing - going out of his way to write this column - from the previous sentence.
The players can be referred to as being on a level playing field with GC and the devs because the article helps them to understand exactly what GC and the devs are intending with the various nerfs and buffs. The players no longer have to guess, and therefore can have much more informed discussions about the upcoming class changes.
For the record, I'm a writer with a degree in English; I live and breathe things like grammar and sentence structure (and annoy the hell out of my co-workers with them). I found this article perfectly readable. I understand you don't mean anything bad, but I do think you're nitpicking quite a bit.
Dboy Jun 16th 2011 10:25PM
Yup, fair call, Alex. I realise now I read the original sentence incorrectly.
Who is on a level playing field with the players, though? I couldn't figure that one out.
Alex Ziebart Jun 16th 2011 10:28PM
Everybody is on a level playing field. Everybody can discuss the changes with full knowledge of why they happened.
julianpage1 Jun 16th 2011 10:34PM
Not that we're straying off the topic here, but....
In this case "Ghostbuster" is the subject, and "is really cool" is the description - "is" being the verb, and "cool" describing the subject - appropriately an adjective. If I were being pedantic, I would ask that commas be used to separate the components of the sentence to make it less ambiguous. But we of the WoW community are so very rarely pedantic...
FWIW, I am more comfortable with changes to class mechanics that encourage players to experiment with different classes, and make them feel like they have options in terms of playing style. More and more frequently we seem to end up with changes that imply that Blizzard wants to force a particular playing style on us, so I am pleased with the clarification with respect to Blood/Holy and Fire/Arcane as mentioned above.
Sadly, I still see no reason to bring my bear tank out of retirement (although the streamlining of tanking gear values is appreciated).
Khirsah Jun 17th 2011 1:02PM
@Dboy...since you are so interested in typos, I think I found a couple in your name: there should be a hyphen after the 'D', the 'o' should be an 'a', and the 'y' should be a 'g'.
D-bag.
JFizzle Jun 17th 2011 5:49PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY
Brock Jun 16th 2011 10:07PM
This is exactly what I want to see. It's great info. Big thanks to GC. I would also like to hear about pvp more though. Like why they don't feel hunters need some pvp help despite having almost no representation at higher rankings.
Chris Jun 16th 2011 10:08PM
And so the warrior gets the nerfbat, again !!
Helston Jun 16th 2011 10:29PM
"We also nerfed Arms and Fury damage across the board because they were doing too much damage in both PvP and PvE. While we are sensitive to casters outperforming melee on several raid encounters, having warriors handily outperform all other melee isn't the solution to that problem."
-With love, a warrior.
On a completely different note: I tried to post this without entering my email address and was told to "provdie an E-Mail".
Crocuta Jun 16th 2011 10:11PM
It may already have been said somewhere, but I would like to hear either a "enhancement shamans are where we want them because we hate them" or " we just don't know what to do with them" /mostly joking
Luotian Jun 16th 2011 11:17PM
XD I've decided on my Shaman (admittedly elemental but I think the idea is the same) that we are meant to be a support class. We're never intended to be top DPS because we're there to help and raids like us for what we bring.
Or that is my theory of the theory.
Makoto99 Jun 17th 2011 12:11AM
Yup. Drop some totems, then break out the Lovely Picnic Basket.
PARTY AT THE FIRELANDS!
Zachariahs Jun 17th 2011 12:17AM
I agree, but now so many other classes bring the exact same buffs and more dps. It'd be nice if they gave shaman dps some love, and I've really never played one.
Khirsah Jun 17th 2011 2:12PM
The whole "bring the player, not the class" thing is hard to figure. On the one hand, there will always be fights that favor melee, and others that favor ranged. There will always be a healing or tanking spec that is always more optimal than others. By giving all classes the same utility, the focus has shifted to these differences. Why bring a rogue when a hunter can bring the same utility and do better damage?
Of course, the opposite was true back in TBC. Bring the rogue because he has certain utility that we need, and does about the same dps as the hunter.
Oddly, the best thing Blizz did for bringing the player was intruduce the LFD system. By now everyone has had a few chances to run instances with someone that is such an a-hole, you'd never run with him again regardless of his dps or utility.
At this point, maybe Blizz should abondon the class homogenization, and bring some revelance back to some of the unique utility that certain classes, like Shaman, can bring. Sure, every class should have a good interrupt, and some decent cc, because those abilities are directly related to fight mechanics. But each class should have a few unique abilities, too. Things that are desirable and a benefit to the group as a whole.
I'm not sure what those abilities should be, but I'm sure the devs could come up with some good ones.
I think the effect would be that rude or unskilled players are left behind, regardless if the utility they bring. And each class would be represented well in raids, their unique abilities a welcome addition to the raid group, but not necessarily crucial for a successful run.
They could even make it so the abilities stack in different ways with different classes. For example, a Shaman can buff the mana regen of the casters, but if there is a rogue in the group, his energy regen is also buffed. More energy is more special attacks. Every time a special attack crits, the hunter gets an extra shot. Every extra shot gives the priest a 25% mana cost reduction on his next ability, which is then refunded back to the shaman to increase his mana/energy regen buff a little more.
The above is an example. I did not calculate any actual figures, but just used that off the top of my head to demonstrate how blizz could utilize unique class buffs. If a link in the chain was missing, it would still work, but having one of every class would provide a sweet, fun mechanic that everone could be a part of.
Anyway, I've strayed pretty far from my main point, which is that I agree shaman are in tough spot, because they play a support role and that role is being added to other classes. But they still have some fun abilities, and I hope blizz keeps some of the utility unique to the shaman class.
DragonFireKai Jun 16th 2011 10:12PM
This is how Blizzard should manage their press release format comuniques. It's a concrete anwer to why they implemented the changes. It's sad that it takes a marine biologist to show blizz's CMs how they should be communicating.
guy_in_a_dress_i.e_mage Jun 16th 2011 10:16PM
I´m loving this patch 4.2 Awesome lore, I really like Firelands instance, legendary staff and now this. My main is fire mage, and I also have a rogue. Fire mages were left intact, they weren´t buffed but also weren´t nerfed, and rogues got ton (well, not exactly ton of, a lot of) buffs. Boo-and-Yah.
Bumblebee Jun 17th 2011 7:59PM
Rogues got a some buffs on damage modifiers just to keep more or less in the same position they are now. The class doesn't scale that well nowadays, and with the high ramp up time and problems with target switching I wouldn't hold my breath for that Top3 DPS spot, even if I played perfectly.
Also, Rogue survivability is nerfed, which means that we still only have 1 working PvP Spec, and the 2 other trees are even worse for PvP than before.
At no point has there been anything said or done about the Mobility issues, or target swapping problems Rogues have.
So, even if the content itself is probly gonna be engaging and fun, Rogues as a class are actually a bit worse off starting Firelands.
Alex Jun 16th 2011 10:27PM
It's kind of disappointing to see that at this phase they still haven't said anything about major changes to BM hunters. It's my favorite spec for hunters, the rotation is smooth I love having a pet that does considerable damage. But the bonus talent for going into BM is just horrible. I've only used intimidation when extreme soloing, never once in a dungeon or raid. It's just useless. I know that 4.2 still isn't out yet so they could still change it.
MusedMoose Jun 16th 2011 10:36PM
Since Intimidation has a stun, I use it as an interrupt, albeit one with a long cooldown. I find it to still be useful in dungeons, can't say about raids since I don't raid with my hunter. But in my experience, it's far from useless.
Arrohon Jun 16th 2011 11:21PM
The spell you get for choosing that tree is meant to make you feel like that spec from level 10. Does that make you feel like a BM hunter?